Dan Lyons

REASONS TO BUG OUT SOON: One reason of course is to get out before the Nov.'04 elections--U.S. backing for the war is sinking fast.
|
But there's another reason to bug out: U.S. (anonymous) policy-makers say that "hostility to the U.S. occupation is growing so fast that, if Iraq does not become self-governing quickly, attacks on U.S. forces could increase." /NYTIMES28NOV /
(Note that this warning is about ORDINARY IRAQIS turning against us, not about Saddamite 'holdouts' or 'foreign infiltrators'.)
-----
Only 5%of Iraqis polled think we invaded to help Iraqis; and only 1% think we'll install a democracy./WashPost12NOV/
--------
Another poll: 4 in 5 Iraqis have 'little confidence' in U.S. forces; 75% have little confidence in Bremer team.
"What was best thing to happen to you in the past year?" 42% of Iraqis cited the fall of Saddam--but 35% said our invasion was the WORST thing to befall them this year ! /USATODAY2DEC
----------
After the Samarrah bloodbath, the US-APPOINTED police chief said succinctly: "Were the French happy under the Nazis? It's the same here." /FinTimes2Dec
|
One guerilla-war expert says all guerillas need is 15% to 25% of the people to offer them 'passive assistance' (not turning them in).
---------
The problem is our lousy intelligence; our officers/men don't even speak the language. "We don't really know who we're up against; so we go around kicking down doors--which is exactly what the guerillas want us to do!" /EdinburghScotsman30NOV
---------
FIFTEEN U.S. TROOPS/ALLIES WERE KILLED IN 5 ATTACKS THIS WEEKEND--just after our Gen.Sanchez bragged about the number of attacks shrinking! ONE HUNDRED coalition personnel have been killed (never mind how many maimed/wounded!) in November./CNN30nov
-----------
Iraqi self-rule might not diminish attacks on GIs !
The only solution is to BRING'EMHOME!
----------
In advocating this drastic withdrawal, with all its awful consequences, I'm assuming that Bush can't--or won't--hand over control in Iraq to UN in a way that practically all Iraqis will accept, while keeping U.S. troops there just to maintain minimal order--will Americans accept an increasing casualty rate? (Iraqis don't trust UN, which administered harsh sanctions for a decade.)
|
I'm assuming that the longer we stay there (as CATO Institute said long ago) the more we'll be hated, and the less able we'll be to do any good there. The bloodbath at Sammarra on Monday illustrates my point.
|
I'm assuming that we will bug out sooner or later, leaving the country in chaos; so the sooner the better, the later the worse. / I welcome discussion of these assumptions.
[See above 'WOULD THIS WORK?" for a proposal of partial pull-out.]

MADMEN IN D.C., NOT PYONGYANG:
Bruce Cumings (history prof at U of Chi and noted authority) says
--that the Rumsfeld gang DOES want to nuke No. Korea;
--Rummies would love to provoke the Kim regime into making 'the first strike' (a classic U.S. tactic).
--Rummies could not destroy N.K. nuclear plants (buried incredibly deep) even with our cunning nuclear missiles that dig down before they explode.
--Rummies don't care that such a war would destroy the great city of Seoul, indeed the whole peninsula--and would slaughter thousands of Yanks stationed there.
--Rummies don't heed the fact that N.K. also has chemical/germ weapons to use as a 2d-strike deterrent: "U.S. can destroy our nation with nukes; but our survivors, from our grave, can MAIM your vulnerable Homeland--so you'd have to be crazy to attack us."
|
Trouble is, Rummy's gang may well be crazy;luckily, however, Rummy seems to be on his way out. Unfortunately, Bush himself seems to have a frothing hatred of North Korea. /cited by LRB.Ltd 26NOV

BUSH'S SHAMELESS LIES TO TROOPS: [NYTIMES28nov]Pres.Bush told the troops in Iraq:
"You and I have taken an oath to defend our country. You're honoring that oath."
Comment: Bush is regularly VIOLATING that oath; he is grossly underfunding Homeland Defense./ Secondly, whatever noble works Iraq GIs are doing, defending our country is NOT among them. How in the world could he say that?
|
Here's the key lie: "You are defeating the terrorists here in Iraq SO THAT we don't have to face them in our own country."
COMMENT: A) Our troops are NOT noticeably DEFEATING Iraqi guerillas; indeed, they are consistently getting more powerful. [See 'Anyplace safe?" below.]
(B) "..SO THAT..' There is absolutely no reason to think that, if we could defeat Iraqi guerillas, our homeland would be ONE BIT SAFER ! There may be thousands of terrorist volunteers all over the world waiting their chance to attack us. The hundreds of billions we're spending on the Iraq fiasco mean even less money for Homeland Defense. Win or lose in Iraq, we will have to face terrorists in our own country.
|
More nonsense: "By building a peaceful and democratic country in the heart of the Middle East, you are defending the American people from danger."
COMMENT: Our troops are NOT 'building a Peaceful Iraq' ! Under our regime, violent crime is rampant.
And IF the new Iraq is DEMOCRATIC, that will mean the majority Shiites will take over, and they may NOT be friendly to America!
'Coalition members warned that an elected constitutional convention could be beyond the control of the Coalition, and could be unfriendly to the U.S."/NYTIMES30NOV
A Shiite-dominated Iraq may well shelter terrorists who will put us MORE in danger.
|
We're not sure if the Pres. is consciously lying, or whether he believes the falsehoods his handlers give him to read. But the things he says are lies. How can you tell when Pres.Bush is telling lies? When he moves his lips.
--------------------
It's amazing how all the hawks now have to repeat the same lie:
Joe Lieberman "This has become a great battle..to win a victory over terrorists...if we don't, they will be emboldened, and we'll pay for it...we cannot let that happen, and it's in our power to stop it." [usatoday1dec]
In fact, terrorists around the world have been recruited wholesale by our arrogant invasion..and they're now being emboldened by our continuing and obvious inability to deal with guerillas in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Rumsfeld has already signalled that we're bugging out of Afghanistan.)
|
It is NOT in our power to stop the terrorists; we will face those threats for years ('win' or 'lose' in Iraq!) The most we can do is to try to 'harden' the obvious 'soft targets' in our Homeland (e.g., our vulnerability to bioterror).

BLAIR REJECTING POODLE-ROLE? The Eur.Union wants to set up a defense committee INDEPENDENT OF U.S.-DOMINATED NATO! Naturally, Bush objects. But surprisingly, Brits' Blair has signed agreement to begin such an independent committee. /FinTimes29NOV
|
NATO has also been weakened by its weak performance in Afghanistan, where UN asked it to try to pacify some areas outside Kabul. No NATO governments have offered many troops for that unsavory task.

QUIET PRIDE: At 6' and 225 lb., I am PROUD to be a FAT AMERICAN!

THREE-NATION MOVE? Leslie Gelb, a senior govt. official (in NYT oped,25nov) flew this trial balloon:
Let's split the artificial entity called Iraq into 3 nations: Northern Kurdland, Southern Shialand, (these 2 getting most of the oil) and wretched, impoverished SunniMiddleLand.
|
This idea has until now never been explored: we feared the Turks would invade any independent Kurdland (but, thinks Gelb, this wouldn't happen--after all, Turkey has put up with semi-independent Kurdland for a decade now. HOWEVER: a) Kurdland would now be incredibly oil-wealthy and therefore powerful; could Turks swallow that? Or would they secretly help the Sunnis attack the Kurds?
(b) now Kurds are forced to allow 5000 Turkish troops to wander in their land at will, supposedly seeking Kurd/Turk rebels hiding out there--would a completely independent Kurdland allow that? (They already have 40,000 trained troops.) Would Turkey stand for stopping that?)
|
We also feared that Shialand would cooperate, perhaps unite with the Ayatollahs of Iran--a horrifying thought till now (and one enraging to our Master Sharon!)
[We wouldn't mind the oil-poor Midland (Saddamite) Sunnis sinking into poverty.]
|
The fury of Israel makes me think this is just a bluff--designed to scare the SaddamiteSunnis into stopping their guerilla attacks. What the threat will do is make sure that the Sunnies, with nothing to lose, with 500,000 well-trained, extravagantly-armed troops, (now experienced as guerillas)--these Saddamites will fight to the death.
So we'd have to defend Kurdland and Shialand. Besides the porous borders with 6 neighbors, we'd have to defend two new borders with Sunniland.
|
The guerillas can now sabotage oil-pipelines at will; why couldn't they continue to do so? (Of course, the Shias and Kurds, motivated by hatred of Saddamites AND lust for the extra oil, might cooperate with us..but there'd still be threats from Saddamites AND from Islamist martyr-murderers sneaking in across all those borders.)
|
Our troops have hitherto managed to enrage any Iraqis they settle among; might they not enrage our new Kurdland/Shialand allies? (Until now the shrewd Brits have soothingly maintained some order in Shialand. Would this continue? Would they take on the task of defending Shialand from fearsome Saddamites?)
|
But consider the only feasible alternative: setting up a ruthless Baathist duplicate of Saddam to TYRANNIZE all Iraq into sullen peace. This would not go over with the U.S. populace, after all the chatter about our introducing DEMOCRACY to the bemused Iraqis.
So this '3-nation' strategy might be the least-bad way for Bush to bug out before Nov. '04. There might be war and slaughter after '04--but who cares?

UNSTOPPABLE PIPELINE SABOTAGE: 3 blasts recently/almost one a week; 4 or 5 per month, ever since invasion; sabotage has practically shut down flow of oil to Turkey.Guerilla says, "They can never protect the pipelines!"
Not just the pipes to Turkey; they're also sabotaging pipelines to bring oil to Iraqis.(Price-rise in gasolene might destabilize worse than sabotage vs. exports; but cutting exports harms 'the future of Iraq'. We had dreamed of selling exports for $50 billion, to finance reconstruction.)
|
In the Shiite South, hundreds of power pylons have been downed to stop electricity from going to hated Baghdad. /INDEPENDENT29NOV
|
Our oil official: "Sabotage operations are virtually impossible to thwart!"
===============
===============
DUMB PRIDE:WHAT THE HELL? Reading [above] that I am proud to be a fat American, people may wonder what I'm getting at.
|
I'm trying to show how dumb this is: "if I am X (fat or American) then I am automatically PROUD to be X. ! "
[At the entrance of a local high-school: Through These Doors Walk the BEST Young People in the World !!" Aw, C'mon.]
|
How dumb are the bumper-stickers saying, "I'm Proud to be an American!'--without telling
a) what it is about America you're proud of, and

(b) why YOU should be proud to be an American, when you had no choice--you were born here. (Usually one is proud of some personal accomplishment, like a hole-in-one--not, for instance, the fact that you were born male. Imagine a bumper sticker that said, "I'm proud to be male!")
Gilbert and Sullivan made this (b) point long ago in a satirical song about people who were proud to be English: "For in spite of all temptation/ to come from some other nation/ he remains an Englishman!"
|
About point (a): what is it about America that one can be proud of? Domestically, I am proud of the increase in tolerance over the last generation (racial tolerance, and lately, even tolerance of gays/lesbians). When I was young, I was (appropriately) ashamed that innocent blacks were getting lynched here, without anyone being punished!
|
But I'm ashamed of the way our politics is completely governed by money: "One dollar, one vote!" And I'm ashamed of the ignorance of our voters: 60% of Americans under 26 can't tell you which party controls Congress--so they can't tell whom to blame for our troubles--so they can't vote intelligently.
(It is this ignorance that makes the money-control possible; people vote by name-recognition, or by the slanted info they get from short--but expensive--TV commercials.)
|
In foreign affairs:
I was once proud of America, right after WWII. We showed intelligent generosity in rebuilding our defeated enemies, Germany and Japan.
Domestically, the wealthy in America accepted a high income-tax rate to guarantee that few Americans would be quite destitute.
Our government made full employment an explicit goal. We had not yet been drawn into the psychosis of the Cold War.
I was still ashamed of the incredible bigotry among Americans; blacks were still getting lynched.
|
Now things are different. Hundreds of millions of people all over the world, including the educated and informed, see Israel and America (with Israel dominant) as the greatest threats to peace in the world.
Indeed, since Sept.'02, this has been our official policy: "We now have many nations at our mercy--and we intend to keep them there! We feel free to launch a nuclear First Strike at any nation that even tries to catch up with us in weapons." Even the Nazis never publicly issued such an incredibly arrogant policy.
|
Our government is not just ruthless; it is stupid. (What else should we expect, with such an ignorant electorate?) Facing a real threat of lethal attacks on our Homeland by fanatic individuals, our government spends our wealth(far over $1 billion each DAY! ) on weapons to attack other nations, NOT on (expensive) measures for defending our homeland.
The Bushies have got us entangled in unwinnable guerilla wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and are trying to start a war with awesomely-armed North Korea!
|
Today I am loyal to America, but not proud of many aspects of America--nor should I be. We should be working to make America a place to be proud of, once again.

MAIMED, WOUNDED OR SICK: Almost 10,000 GIs have been evacuated from Iraq for treatment of physical or psychiatric ailments (not counting those who sought psychiatric treatment after returning home; not counting those treated in Iraq, not evacuated.) /ORLANDO SENTINEL28nov
|
The army brags about the (relatively) low number of GIs killed (almost 3 a day in November!) That's because the flak-jackets protect only the torso, so those hit by shrapnel survive; but they may lose their arms, legs, eyes, face, or mind. /
|
Another report said that ONE IN FIVE of those evacuated had brain-damage (perhaps worse than death); SEVEN IN TEN had some injury that might result in damage to brain or spine. (U.S. media have been generally silent about these maimed/wounded statistics.)
|
It's unfortunate that they're now cutting funds for Veterans' Hospitals (Denver Hospital went from 52 nurses to 15)--when these poor unfortunates may spend part or ALL of their remaining lives there!

THE GREAT AWAKENING! Only ONE IN THREE Americans polled by LATIMES now think the war was 'worth it' in lives and money.
86% worry we're in a quagmire./c&S Roberts column,UNITED FEATURES SYNDICATE28NOV.
OOPS! A new poll shows that over 50% of Americans still think 'war was worth it'. / Over 50% disapprove of Bush's handling the war. /USATODAY2DEC ?????
---------
55% think we went to war on false assumptions. Only 42% think Bush is honest. But they like his personality (Americans don't think honesty is all that important.)
77% say we must stay in until there's a stable Iraqi govt. /ChristScoMonitor1Dec (Of course, if Bushies have decided to pull out soon, this 'stay the course' opinion of 77% could be trouble for them!)
-----------------
54% now disapprove of Bush's handling of the Iraq situation. /GannetNewsSvc30Nov.
=========
THOUGHTS & ACTION: The basic problem is that the Bushies' main concerns are domestic: getting re-elected (so Bush jaunts off to raise money, but not to visit families of war-dead); shovelling money to the wealthy--especially to weapons-makers and Haliburton-type corporations.
But then they lunge ignorantly into world affairs.
|
Alas, they think locally and act globally.

NOT SO FAST, CHARLIE! U.S. general bragged that our heavy bombing had forced a 70% drop in guerilla attacks on Baghdad. Then, Friday, rockets slammed into OIL MINISTRY HQ ! plus two Western hotels.
These rockets came from DONKEY CARTS! (The whole Muslim 3d-world must be chuckling over this David/Goliath move.) A U.S. officer:"Most people would not expect rockets to be launched from donkey-carts.'
DUH!
This attack on the oil-ministry did not much raise world futures-prices on oil--because these prices had ALREADY RISEN from fear of terrorist attacks!
/REUTERS21NOV

SINCERE? SO WHAT? ( letter to NYTIMES )
The review of N.Liddell's book HUG THEM CLOSE (20NOV) says that the book portrays Tony Blair as willing to risk his career in supporting Bush's invasion of Iraq because he sincerely believed in that enterprise. So what?
Mr.Blair should have known that ousting Saddam would involve enormous bloodshed ('in fact, 11,000 Iraqis dead and many, many more maimed or wounded; plus 400 GIs dead and up to 9000 maimed or wounded, with 1 in 5 of the seriously wounded sustaining brain damage)--at the time of decision, everyone expected there would be house-to-house fighting in Baghdad, and that Saddam would use gas and germs against the invaders;
--he should have known that there was no real evidence that Saddam posed any clear threat to Britain or America.
--Blair should have known that the Rumsfeld team had no sensible plans for handling Iraq after the conquest;
--he should have known that invasion would make the recruiting of terrorists throughout the world much easier.
--If he knew all that, he should have seen all along that the project was, as the Pope said, "unjust, illegal and disastrous".
|
I don't doubt Blair's sincerity and dedication; but those qualities are disastrous when they're not accompanied by wisdom and good sense.
After all, there's no world figure who is so obviously sincere and dedicated as Osama bin Laden, that millionaire living in a cave somewhere with an enormous bounty on his head. We would all wish that bin Laden were not so unselfishly dedicated; so also I wish Blair had been more crassly interested in his political future.
==========
Blair came up with the same old shit to justify Iraq campaign: "Defeating terrorists in Iraq is an essential part of defeating terrorists who are killing innocents all over the world."/ Independent20NOV/
We should all get clear on this: 'winning' in Iraq will not make the rest of the world ONE BIT SAFER from terrorists, whose number increases with every aggressive move by the West. Indeed, the money and attention spent on the Iraq fiasco inevitably means even less money for our grossly-underfunded Homeland Defense needs.
For that matter, 'losing ' in Iraq won't make much difference either..except for possibly raising the morale of terrorists. And their morale is already raised by successes like 5 copters downed in 3 weeks in Iraq, by 4 spectacular bombings in Istanbul--and ESPECIALLY the shelling of the OIL MINISTRY HQ in Baghdad by rockets launched from a DONKEY-CART ! (See above.)
In fact, if I were in charge of alQaeda, I'd WANT U.S./Britain to stay in Iraq for months and years--so I could discredit their stupid tactics at leisure and spread the word all over the Muslim world.
==========
Blair may be dumb-but-sincere; but other leaders in his Labor Party knew better, and went along from expediency. Now we hear that Labor has slipped behind even the feckless Tories in the polls--just because of Iraq--and perhaps because of Bush's visit. One feels little sympathy.

BLUNDERS WORSE THAN CRIMES: It's as if we want the whole Muslim world to see us as another Israel. We've sealed off Saddam's home village with barbed-wire (residents must show ID to enter/leave).
We've bulldozed whole orchards to punish farmers for not turning in guerilllas. (A farmer was asked what his orchard had been worth. He responded: "If they cut off my arm, would you ask what it was worth?" )
Iron Hammer bombing telegraphs desperation, not strength./Wm.Lind in WashDispatch19NOV
|
DESTROYING HOMES: In our new muscle-flexing bombardments, we're deliberately destroying homes of guerilla-suspects (after giving maybe 5 minutes warning to get out). Members of US-appointed Tikrit governing Council: "How can a great State be so shallow? It's winter and women & children are put out in the street." /Knight-Ridder20nov
US is not just slavishly promoting Sharon's interests; we're now also imitating his tactics (which are being denounced as counterproductive even by senior Israeli military figures.)

WHAT PLACE IS SAFE? The Bushies keep telling us that MOST of Iraq (except the area around Tikrit) is pretty safe. But today a suicide-bomber wounded dozens and killed a few at the HQ of a pro-US political party in Northern Kurdish territory. A similar bomb went off in another Kurdish city a couple of days ago..and there have been plenty of attacks near Northern city of Mosul (including the one that downed 2 copters at once!) Also, a pro-US politician was just shot in Southern Shiite city of Basra. / AP20nov
|
Since 1 May, 2227 attacks in Sunni Triangle; FOURTEEN HUNDRED AND SIXTEEN OUTSIDE. Total average: more than 20 a day.
U.S. intelligence officer: "Worry is that the spread of these attacks could broaden support for guerillas among ordinary Iraqis."
Attacks in Southern Shiite areas (once peaceful, because the Shiites were grateful we had protected them from hateful Saddam)--such attacks have DOUBLED since August./ BostonGlobe30NOV
|
7 Spanish intelligence agents were killed and 1 wounded South of Baghdad. TV showed youths uttering pro-Saddam chants and kicking the dead bodies./ 2 of 'our' policemen drove by on their motorcycles while this was going on; neither stopped. /NETSCAPENEWS29NOV/ This was shortly after 2 dozen Italians were blown up.
|
There were 150 attacks on Iraqis during the month of Ramadan/INDEPENDENT29NOV. Thirty-three allied foreigners were killed in November. /Reuters30nov.
|
For anyone in Iraq, siding with U.S. anywhere is pretty risky.

BRITS ARE SUCKERS! While Bush is sipping tea with the queen, Brits should reflect on this: Tony Blair has dragged them into real trouble by playing poodle to Bush.
--Nearly 500 wounded, 25 dead in bombs set off at British Consulate & Brit bank in Istanbul. CNN20nov
--The Taliban controlled opium quantities grown in Afghanistan. Brits helped U.S. throw out the Taliban, returning Afghans to 'rule by warlords'.
These war-lords are also drug-lords; under 'allied' rule, Afghan opium-production has skyrocketed[2003 production is THIRTY-SIX times the production during the last year of Taliban rule!] -- to the point where the PRICE of heroin has dropped..encouraging drug-use in Britain...Practically all of heroin used in London comes now from Afghanistan.
-----------
However, many Brits see the folly of Blair's toadyism. Not just the tens of thousands demonstrating this week against Bush/Blair; but there is also this interesting fact: Bush had intended to give his arrogant pro-war speech to Parliament (which procedure is pretty common with visiting Heads of State on State visits)--but worry about the MPs shouting back at him made him cancel that occasion, and give his speech before a 'selected audience'.
|
Only one in four Brits has a favorable view of Bush.
Number of protesters? 100,000 says ABC/ 200,000 say the protesters.
/ABCNEWS20nov

WHAT THE HELL? We're dropping two-thousand-pound bombs on EMPTY BUILDINGS /USATODAY20NOV. Why in the world would we do that?
IF the buildings are being used by guerillas, why don't we just send in some engineers with a little dynamite to blow them up?
Our generals say they drop these huge suckers to 'show our power' to the Iraqis. But they already know, from our original onslaught, that we're good at bombing.
What baffles and enrages Iraqis is that we seem to be incompetent at everything else (e.g., restoring electricity).
|
Ah, but we have those big babies left over from the assault. We have to destroy them, so the bomb-making corporations can get more billions to replace them.
|
Also, perhaps, our generals are like the many American males who patronize 'Action-movies'--they love to watch things go BOOM !

BUG-OUT NEARS? U.S. is asking for another UN 'approval resolution' (the first 2 didn't bring troops or money into Iraq!) Anonymous Bushy said, "We want to pave the way for international acceptance for a new government and get a blessing for its legiitimacy." Said another: "We need a new resolution to bless our exit strategy.It'll be much harder to get out and leave behind a viable government if it doesn't have some form of UN approval." /WashPost19nov|
The real goal: the Bremer gang, as foreign occupier, can't legally bind Iraq with contracts to open up Iraq to domination by world corporations. But a 'provisional government' accepted by other governments as legitimate, COULD sign such binding contracts. [See ANOTHER CON JOB below.]
-----------
CHALABI, (formerly the darling of the Pentagon) is dismayed at the new bug-out plans; the whole 'transfer' of power, he says, is designed so Bush can stand in Baghdad Airport in OCT '04 (just before the election) to congratulate the new 'government'. /EdinburghScotsman30NOV

SWOOSH-BOOM "Wile E.Coyote' RESPONSE: Pent. is responding to increased guerilla attacks in the only way they know: with huge bombs and shells aimed at SUSPECTED guerilla locations.
London expert says this "boom-campaign" is really aimed to assuage U.S. vanity, humiliated at our helplessness against guerillas. It won't make Iraqi or U.S. forces more secure. Instead, it will inflame hatred, confirm their view of U.S. as brutal occupying force, and ensure that ordinary Iraqis will side with the guerillas.
Another expert says this is like using a sledgehammer to fight flies.
[Lyons: no, it's like pounding with a hammer on a hive of killer bees, rousing and enraging them.]
|
How do U.S. generals respond to such criticisms? "We're making enemy realize he is overmatched, so he should surrender." /Reuters19nov.
|
Wow! One is reminded of Wile E.Coyote, who presented himself at Bugs Bunny's door with a card reading, "I am bigger and stronger than you are. Please simplify things by promptly surrendering." Bugs didn't surrender, and one doubts that the guerillas will!

ANOTHER CON JOB: --The new agreement (between Bremer gang and the puppet Council for a 'power shift' to Iraqis) leaves the Bremerites with power over the kind of political structure that emerges: e.g., it must mirror the U.S.government (with executive, legislative and judicial branches separated); the structure of the new constitution can't take effect without Bremer/Bush's approval. (Indeed the Bremerites will 'help write' the new constitution ! )
|
(Bremer plans to staff the 'constitutional convention' by 'caucuses' of all the different factions--an easy system to corrupt. But the Shiite leaders demand an elected convention, which would give them, as clear majority, the controlling power.)
Now it turns out that Bremer has yielded to the Shiite Ayatollah: the convention that will write the constitution will have ELECTED (i.e., predominantly Shiite) members./FinTimes29Nov
|
The accord (under this agreement) must be finalized 4 months before power is handed over; it must give U.S. a 'wide latitude to provide for the safety and security of the Iraqi people'..in other words, it must leave our troops in Iraq for as long as Bushies desire. /DeWayne Wickham's column in USATODAY17NOV/ In other words, the continued power of occupying troops would make sure that the new 'provisional' government doesn't get out of hand. Will Iraqis accept such an imposed change as legitimate?
|
--the problem Bushies are trying to address : their 'Council' is seen by Iraqis--indeed, even by many Council members--as a complete puppet; the guerillas have already shot one member! So Bushies want to set up a more plausible puppet, a 'transitional, provisional government'--(like their impotent Kharzai regime in Afghanistan?)
-------------
What would be the important changes imposed by such a new puppet regime? After 'Communism fell' in Russia, there was an orgy of PRIVATIZATION, (selling off public assets to private investors at low prices, where the assets were stripped, not developed) which created a class of Russian robber-baron billionaires, but wrecked the Russian economy.
Now the Bremer gang seem to be planning a similar orgy in Iraq.
|
U.S. plans to "upend Iraq's closed, state-run economy and convert it to one of the most open, capitalist economies in the world..which would unleash new waves of unrest.." [Lyons:..open to control by the world's wealthy...]
"They have already approved a plan to abolish most restrictions on trade, capital flows, and foreign investment, allowing..foreign banks to buy Iraq banks..Top tax rates for the wealthy and for corporations would be [only] 15%; tariffs on imports would be slashed to 5%." [Lyons: ..so advanced foreign corporations could export goods to Iraq and undersell any Iraqi firms who try to compete.]
"The present plan does not address the PRIVATIZATION of state-owned companies (other than the ones dealing with oil) which [the Bremerites] are considering."
"[Such privatization] would be reckless in the context of Iraq, with no peace or stability, no rule of law, no court system."
A Congressional Research Service confirms that the sale of state assets by an occupying power violates the laws of war. BUT IF Bremerites could set up a puppet regime that would be acknowledged by other countries as a legitimate government, then this regime could sign binding contracts and sell off state property. (That's what the British did before they withdrew from Iraq; they wangled a 75-year-contract to control Iraq oil! One expects that Bushies want to imitate the Brit success--but they don't have the Brits' brains!)
(Question: how many other countries would accept THIS regime as legitimate Iraq government?)
PRIVATIZATION: "We have [much experience] of trying ['shock economic therapy', code for sudden privatization of a state-run economy] and it's..a disaster."
|
Investors would never buy into chaotic Iraq unless they could get the assets at far less than they are worth...producing deep resentment by Iraqis at the stripping and sale of publicly-owned assets..just as the Russians were angered by the bargain sale to buccaneers of their state property. / AssocPress17Nov.
--------------------------
The most important question: will the 'interim constitution', followed by elections in 2005, WORK to cut down the guerilla attacks on GIs? (e.g., will enough Iraqis favor the interim government as legitimate, and start turning in the guerillas?) An Iraqi expert in U.S.: "You can have a golden plan; but if we don't get a hold on the violence,it may not make any difference." One Iraqi said, "The Council did nothing for the people; so nobody will recognize the next government either."
A large number of Iraqis (esp. among the nearly 2 in 3 who are Shiites) want a more-or-less theocratic government run by Muslim clerics (at least as theocratic as Iran regime!) The Shiites are the most organized group now in Iraq--the secularists have not organized well at all. (The Saddamite secularists haven't bothered to organize politically--they intend to take over again by driving GIs out.) Americans are determined not to allow such an Iran-type--perhaps pro-Iran!--regime. Another expert: " [When the new plan takes form,] the minute some sides see they're not going to win, we may get whole new coalitions of resistance."
|
Another expert: "Arab Iraqis worry that we're going to give the Kurds semi-independent status. This will increase the resistance, I assure you." (The Kurdish area has much of the oil!) If we make this move, Turkey might be tempted to intervene. But if we DON'T give some degree of autonomy to the Kurds, we could face 40,000 trained Kurdish troops, who might 'fade away' to augment the guerilla war. [Guerilla attacks have already escalated tremendously in Mosul, in the Kurdish area.]
Will the Sunni Muslims in Central Iraq collude with the Sunni Kurds, to try blocking the majority Shiites? Or will the Central Iraq Arabs collude with the Shiite Arabs to block Kurdish semi-autonomy? Or will all 3 groups continue as competing factions, like the different warlords in Iraq?
|
(The Central Iraqi Sunnis would get crushed if the Kurds and Shiites colluded, still hating the C.I.Sunnis for their having been crushed under Saddam. The Kurdish North and the Shiite South have most of the oil, and (together) an overwhelming majority of the people. That's why the Saddamites will not move to politics, will continue trying to drive out the GIs by guerilla war.)
This is the 'rat's nest' the Bushies have blundered into.
|
An Israeli professor has suggested that Iraqis might want to split into 3 nations. /FinTimes18NOV/ Iraqis might suspect that this suggestion is to weaken a possible enemy of Israel (now that dream of reconstructing Iraq as Friend of Israel has faded!) /Again, mid-Iraq Sunnis would be ruined..so of course they'll continue guerilla war.
|
Suppose the guerilla attacks don't decrease--or even increase? (A NYTIMES correspondent, on PBS, says our generals tell him that our casualty-rates 'will increase before they decrease.') A prestigious Brit Think Tank says flatly that THE ATTACKS WILL CONTINUE AS LONG AS THE U.S. IS IN IRAQ! /INDEPENDENT19NOV
|
Dem.candidate Gen.Clark suspects that Bushies have a fall-back plan: set up the transitional govt. by June '04, to get Iraqi 'permission' to bug out before our '04 election. [Let's hope this is so.]

CHOICE BITS:
--Rush Limbaugh said, "I can no longer try to live my life by making other people happy." /A. Hitler has been discovered alive in So.America, and asked to take over again in Germany: "OK, but no more Mr. Nice Guy!"
|
Colo. Republ.Rep. Beauprez was in Iraq, reporting that things are going well; but his group had to return early, because planes at Baghdad airport were threatened by shoulder-missiles.
|
A quote from Rudyard Kipling is very apt today:
"If you're asked why we died,
Say 'because their fathers lied.' "
|
An Italian counsellor for Bremer regime has resigned, saying "They don't understand Iraqis; they're creating anger & distrust among the population." /CoxNewsSvc18NOV
|
U.S. general, after lobbing 500-lb bombs at 'suspected' guerilla hideouts near populated areas: "We've bombed these sites before, but we wanted to show that we had power and were ready to use it."/REUTERS18NOV/ In other words, they're bombing ruins and rubble just to show off their muscle!
After one bombing, 2 men armed with assault rifles ran away; one was killed, one got away. (Figuring the cost of a bombing mission--from Quatar--how much do you suppose that one dead guerilla cost us?)
Someone has suggested that instead of a 'show of force', a 'demonstration of our resolve', what the occupation forces need is a demonstration of COMPETENCE.
---Oil prices are expected to rise sharply, partly because of 'terrorist threats to supply' (in Iraq and in Saudi Arabia). All that blood for cheap oil, and then we don't get the god-damned cheap oil.
Cheap oil, encouraging SUVs and the destructive highway culture, is indeed God- damned.

MORE BUSH/BREMER BUNGLING:
--We say we are going to gradually 'hand over' the security (anti-guerilla) job from our troops to Iraqi 'security forces' (so they'll get killed instead of our troops.) Of course all this depends on our ability to RECRUIT Iraqi men for these forces.
These poor saps are expected to risk their lives [Saddam just called for guerillas to put attacking 'collaborators' even ahead of attacking Americans!]--for about $100 a month.
They see Americans protected by flak-jackets, which they don't get.
|
Rumsfeld says there are 120,000 Iraqi 'security personnel' on duty; but half of them are poor wretches guarding the pipelines, armed only with radios. They're sent out after ONE DAY of instructions. Rumsfeld: "It's a way to get them out on the street, doing things." [Assoc.Press18nov]
|
The regular training has been cut to 3 weeks,--also the vetting (screening out men secretly on the side of the guerillas!). Some U.S. generals suspect that some of 'our' Iraqi police are organizing some guerilla attacks! (How could we possibly screen out guerilla sympathizers from our police recruits, when WE DON'T EVEN SPEAK THE LANGUAGE!
|
--Remember: Congress has already shovelled to the Rumsfeld/Bremer gang well over $100,000,000,000 [$100 billion] for Iraq, besides the standard $1,100,000,000 [$1.1 billion]that goes to the Pentagon every DAY.
|
AND YET (wait for it!) our police in Baghdad just rioted because they hadn't got their pay for the last three months!
/USATODAY17NOV. /! ! ! !
|
The guerilla-leaders also have money to pay for young recruits [$1 billion, and another $3billion stored in Syria.
They offer $200 to $500 for each attack on Americans.
[INDEPENDENT19NOV]
Also, they can offer the added glamour of fighting against crude, hostile, clumsy, infidel invaders--while our police have to work alongside, and be humiliated by, contemptuous GIs.*footnote\/
(As I said, the 5 copters brought down in the last 3 weeks by cheap weapons adds to that guerilla glamour.)
|
Lots of luck to our recruiters !
|
Iraq has been flooded with these 'instant constables' for over a month--but notice that 2 or 3 GIS each day are still being killed (SEVENTY-NINE ALREADY IN NOVEMBER!) [USATODAY20NOV] and many more are being wounded.
-----------
GIs pulled out of Samara, leaving Iraqi 'replacements'; immediately the guerillas, using machine-guns, mortars and greneades, overran Samara, looting the former U.S. bases..the local 'civil defense' chief said, "We can't handle this alone!" /Assoc.Press19NOV
===============
*footnote: GIs have always been scornful of their alien allies:
In Korean war: "What do you get when you mate an ape with a Gook? A retarded ape."

AFGHAN TALIBAN RESURGENCE: The Taliban, slipping over from Pakistan, used to restrict activities to attacking remote outposts. But they just attacked an armed convoy, and have set off bombs in cities.
"3 provinces are now beyond Kabul govt's. control, with Taliban de facto in control. The schools U.S. bragged about are now closed, replaced by 'madrasses' inculcating radical Islam." /[N.KristovNYT,17NOV]
Americans just claimed they killed 300 guerillas--this has had little impact.
Taliban arose originally to fight warlord-anarchy--and were accepted for that mission; this anarchy has returned. They now have a safe haven in Pakistan and enough funds. They're out to make the SE section of Afgh. too insecure for development to happen--and they're succeeding.
Terrific resurgence of drug-selling, once curbed by Taliban. "1 in 10 vehicles carry drugs." Dealers help to castrate Kabul central govt. /GUARDIAN 16nov
It's ironic that Taliban had managed to cut down opium-trade considerably; Brits joined America in ousting Taliban; now most opium entering London (at reduced prices, because of overproduction) is from 'free' Afghanistan. SUCKERS! /Guardian16NOV
--------
Out of 7000 soldiers of central Afghan 'govt', 2000 have deserted because of the PITIFUL PAY ! /EdinburghScotsman30NOV

GIs LEFT IN IRAQ? They're hoping to hold Iraq elections by the end of 2005. But Rumsfeld says that doesn't mean GIs will be pulled out then!
The political situation and the troop-stationing are 2 different issues /Reuters16NOV
Does that mean that GIs will still be in Iraq in 2006? with several killed, and many, many more maimed or wounded each week? (Gen.Sanchez says we'll incur casualties 'as long as we stay here.' )
|
"YES, TILL 2006!' say Bush&Blair[Observer16NOV] Obviously they believe that the Iraqis will learn to love our troops soon, and start turning in guerillas. BUT SUPPOSE THEY DON'T...
Or suppose U.S. enlistments/reenlistments sag so much that they don't have troops to replace those there now?
|
Will the American people stand still for that steady bloodletting?
Will Bush want that to continue right up to election '04 and beyond?
--------
'King' Bremer says our troops will no longer count as occupation forces, but as an 'invited presence'. He seems pretty damn sure that this presence will be invited. His certainty will reassure Iraqis that U.S. will still control Iraq, whether they like it or not.
|
Bremer also said that the interim constitution (which we're 'helping them write') and also the permanent constitution, will 'embody these AMERICAN VALUES.' /Reuters16nov / He couldn't have said anything better calculated to further enrage the Iraqis.
The silver-tongued devil!

NOW IT'S CATCHING SADDAM ! Bush lately has been saying that a key goal in Iraq is catching Saddam. (For a long time there was little talk of Saddam!)
Now the goal is not converting MiddleEast to democracy; not even restoring the oil industry in Iraq. One suspects that the 'Saddam' buzz is to distract everyone from the prospect of a fairly quick pull-out.
Let's hope they catch Saddam, to camouflage the 'exit strategy'. But suppose they can't--they haven't caught bin Laden either, despite a $25 million bounty on each.
Where's the camouflage then?

NOT RUNNING DOWN AMERICANS: Some have said that I never lose a chance to tell how ignorant Americans are, as if we're the only ignorant people. I've never said that..I don't know what the rest of the world is like (though we do know that by international tests, our students' performance is quite low--even of our 'next-to-the-top' students --say from 60th to 90th percentile).
I lived 3 years in Britain, and learned that they really neglect their bottom students. However, their next-to-top students are rigorously challenged, and perform at a very high level. (I can say that few CSU students would ever survive the rigorous standards of Glasgow Univ..I've taught at both schools.)
And it is the next-to-top students that count when you're asking how competent are our diplomats and bureaucrats forming and implementing our international policies..we have some reason to think that Pres. Bush is NOT among the world's top students of world affairs!
|
Considerations like this persuade me that U.S. should quit posing as 'leader of the Free World' or 'Reformer of Middle East'; we should retreat to Fortress America and try to defend ourselves from the imminent threat of terrorist attacks against our Homeland.

"U.S.KILLS 7 SUSPECTED GUERILLAS" (Headline) :
That's the trouble--we have no reliable info on who ARE the guerillas. We can kill lots of people, all right; they may well be guerillas--but they may instead be innocent people whose enraged relatives will then help or join the guerillas.
Whereas the GIs they kill certainly ARE GIs.
|
This illustrates perfectly the maddening aspect of regular soldiers going against guerillas--especially in a situation where the soldiers (& their officers) DON'T EVEN KNOW THE LOCAL LANGUAGE!
|
U.S. honchos refer to 'attacking guerilla hideouts', as if guerillas were living in the desert, separate from the population. But in fact they're living in people's houses. Young males are joining the guerillas, attracted by the 'glamour' of guerilla fighting against cumbersome invaders. /OBSERVERS16NOV/
You can bet the guerilla cause will seem much more glamorous now that they've brought down 5 fearsome Copters in less than a month--2 at the same time, with one shot from a $50 weapon!
A NO-WIN situation for us.

VIET/IRAQ CASUALTY COMPARISONS:
U.S. started our Viet war in 1961. From '62 to'64, only 392 GIs died in Vietnam. Whereas, since 9/11/01, in our 'war on terror', 488 GIs have died in Iraq, Afghanistan, Phillipines, SW Asia, and elsewhere. /Reuters
And in both wars, a far higher number were wounded; in Iraq, the excess of wounded over dead is higher than ever--because the flak-jackets protect the torso (so the GI survives) but he may suffer severe brain-damage (1 in 5 of the wounded in WalterReed Hosp.) or may lose arm, leg, eye, or face.
|
Of course, in '62-'64 we were just 'dipping our toe' into the conflict. Later we rushed in 500,000, and several hundred thousands of GIs were killed, wounded or maimed.
Let's hope that this time we 'pull our toe' quickly out of the bloody mess.
-----------
UPDATE: PENTAGON NOW ADMITS THAT THE TOTAL OF GIS KILLED, WOUNDED, PLUS THOSE EVACUATED TO GERMANY/US FOR 'non-combat'REASONS IS OVER NINE THOUSAND ! /UPI15nov

CIA WARNS OF SUPER-GERM WARFARE: /Reuters15nov/
ALQUAEDA PLANS TO USE GAS/GERM WARFARE:/r.MTN.NEWS15NOV
|
SUPERMAN HASN'T NOTICED THE KRYPTONITE:
New germs--whose development is often pioneered by Americans, but which will be immune to our detection methods and vaccines--are on the horizon.
War-germs are the great equalizer, the 3d-world's ['2d-strike deterrent'] answer to 1st-world's nukes and super-missiles.
U.S. thinks it is 'sole superpower', asserts (in Sept. '02 document) that we have other nations under our thumb and will keep them there.
But if we destroy another government, and they have nothing to lose, they might unleash on us (and on the world) some unheard-of epidemics.
|
Many of us feared that Saddam, facing destruction of his regime, might donate supergerms to 'martyr-murderer' groups who would infect themselves and spread new diseases among poor Americans, then to rich Americans. We have wondered why he didn't do that--but now it appears he may not think his regime IS doomed; he may have declined army/army conflict with U.S., planning the very guerilla-campaign that is now driving us out of Iraq.
|
N.Korea and maybe Iran are developing NUKES to serve as 2d-strike deterrents [warning us that 'You can destroy our government, but then 'from our grave' we can maim U.S. homeland severely.'] But other threatened nations (like Syria) may be preparing CHEAP, UNFINDABLE super-germs with which to respond to U.S. or Israeli attacks.
|
This is the time for Americans to see that ALL HUMANITY IS AT RISK--the rich and powerful as well as poor nations. Superman faces kryptonite, so he had better learn to live with the rest of humanity as an equal, not posing as a demigod.
|
This reminds us also of the crucial NURSE-SHORTAGE here already: one hospital here pays $15,000 to lure nurses from other hospitals; in the East, they pay $30,000!
IF the Bush-team gave a damn about home-defense, their first priority, facing possible war-germ attacks, would be recruiting and training--with emergency urgency--more medical personnel. But no--their first priority is eleven hundred millions per DAY to the Pentagon.

WHY THE SWITCH? Bushies earlier rejected French/German proposal to set up interim govt. right away, before constitution is written & full elections are held. Now, that's the U.S. position. Why?
|
An expert on Dem.Transitions (for Carnegie Peace Foundation) says:
"Bushies (esp.Pentagon) mistakenly thought Iraqis would accept a prolonged U.S. rule while they wrote constitution, did a census, and registered voters." /USATODAY14NOV '/ Now they know better.
|
Bushies now talk of U.S. appointing a set of 'leaders from each faction' to select an interim government, as they did in selecting Kharzai in Afghanistan. But we should remember that Kharzai's govt. is almost powerless outside Kabul--the factions have not yielded their power to the central govt. That sounds as if perhaps the leaders selected by U.S. weren't all that representative of the factions.
Indeed, the last I heard, Kharzai had to rely on AMERICAN bodyguards! Afghans couldn't be trusted near him.
|
Also, there are no Iraqis that are even minimally accepted by all the factions (as Kharzai was). Certainly not our crook CHALABI !
|
So the Afghan model is not very promising for setting up an interim government in Iraq.

'ALQAEDA' (perhaps) DENIES IT BOMBED MUSLIMS IN SAUDI ARABIA: /Reuters15NOV/
Someone claiming to speak for alQaeda denied that they were behind the awful bombings of residential sections of Ryadh. That leaves open all kinds of possible villains: alQaeda (still) , or 'agents provacateur' (trying to discredit alQaeda with the Saudi population)
These could be the Saudi Royals or some Israeli force or some U.S. force (the groups that would most benefit from discrediting A.Q.)
What is sure: alQuaeda has NOT claimed 'credit' for the Saudi bombings, as the purported A.Q. source HAS claimed credit for the Iraq bombings--A.Q. has also claimed 'credit' for bombing the synagogues in Istanbul/ABCNEWS16NOV/
Also, if the bombings unite Saudis behind the Royals--as one might expect--then it would have been pretty dumb of A.Q. to commit the atrocities--especially this latter one.

SAME OLD SHIT: from Fareed Zakaria (NEWSWEEK) on why he was right to favor the war:
|
Z. ADMITS he was wrong to think Saddam had WMDs; he admitted all along there was no link to AlQaeda. But he reminds us of how EVIL Saddam is, though he admits there is a big gap between a villain's INTENTIONS and his CAPABILITIES. But Z. still has 2 arguments to defend the war:
|
--1) Since the sanctions weren't working, and would have to be dropped, "at some point the world would have to deal with Saddam, nuclear armed and dangerous. Why not now, when he is weak?"
HOWEVER: There were other possibilities, besides the clumsy sanctions. for containing Saddam: if he started a big nuclear program (WHICH WE NOW KNOW HE HADN'T EVEN STARTED YET), we should have been able to detect it--with all our super-spy-technology. We could then bomb his plant, as Israel did earlier. We didn't have to kill/maim/wound tens of thousands more Iraqis,besides the ones harmed by the sanctions! We didn't have to get thousands of GI maimed (brain damage, loss of legs, arms, eyes, face).
Besides, what great harm to world peace would it be if Saddam had produced a few primitive, clumsy A-bombs and joined the nuclear club of about a dozen nations ? (Pakistan is really worrying! ) / By the way, while we were fussing over Saddam's non-existent nuke program, North Korea went ahead and began producing nukes!
|
About gas/germ programs: S. had a perfect right to develop gas/germs to punish invaders. (Mystery is why he didn't use them !)
Dozens of villains around the world have developed gas/germs...especially America. Our scientists just made a virus from non-life.
-----------------
-2) (perhaps stolen from Tom Friedman?)"DONE RIGHT, an invasion could be the single best path to reform the Arab world....were Saddam's regime replaced by a state respecting human rights, rule of law, and the free market..it could begin to transform the Arab world."
Yes, and IF my walking on water were done right, I wouldn't need a boat.
|
It's a mark of our uniquely naive arrogance that we would think that IGNORANT AMERICA (where, in 2000, only 6 people in the entire country majored in Arabic) could understand how to remake the strange culture of the Arab world.

CLUSTER-BOMBS: These are cute little creatures which explode to scatter smaller bomblets all around the area. 5-30% don't explode when they fall, exploding later when picked up by civilians USUALLY CHILDREN.
Most of these demonic devices are used by Russia,China, and the U.S. /USATODAY14NOV/ They are all over Afghanistan--but the natives there might not know whether they are Russian (from their war there) or American (from our recent assault).
However, in Iraq, everyone knows that the hundreds or thousands of such devices lying around were dropped by Americans WHO KNEW THE DANGERS TO CHILDREN. And then we wonder why ordinary Iraqis are turning against us to support the guerillas!

COUNT THE WOUNDED! The Pentagon now admits that about 2000 GIs have been maimed or wounded in Iraq. (1 in 5 have 'serious brain damage': that's 400; 7 in 10 have injuries that 'could result' in spine/brain damage..that's 1400.) No one has told how many GIs have lost arms, legs, eyes, or faces. (Flak-jacket protects only the torso.)
|
However, people at Andrews AF Base, receiving seriously wounded GIs by airlift, say there have been 7000 wounded. (1300 brain-damage, 5000 possible spine/brain injuries.)
|
Plus, of course, 400 killed so far. An awful toll for a needless war, a pointless war--for a heartless, brainless, luckless war.

PITTANCE FOR HOME DEFENSE: The budget for the Homeland Security Dept. for the whole year of 2004 will be about $30 billion--which is, as we'd expect, less than the money that will go to the Pentagon in a month./INFORMATIONWEEK13NOV/
The Bush-team care about Homeland Defense only as a slogan to shovel more money to the Pentagon (irrelevant to Home Defense) and as a slogan to justify further curbs in our civil rights.
|
How do they dare neglect defense of our homeland vs. terrorists? They may be thinking that the 9/11 attack--in spite of evidence that it was preceded by enormous Bushie neglect of intelligence--moved Americans instinctively further to the right; the next attack (no matter what Bushie neglect is involved) may well move the populace again even further to the right. They can't lose!

OPERATON 'IRON HAMMER': One wonders how much time our top honchos spend on finding cute names for their various failing strategies. The latest one, (punitive bombing and shelling) is called 'IRON HAMMER'.
What that suggests is a moron pounding with a hammer on a hive of killer bees, rousing and enraging them. (On the first day of the new campaign, attacks on Yanks or allies surged up to FORTY-SIX! /NYT14NOV )
|
We're told that the shelling is of places 'known to have harbored terrorists'. Then why didn't they attack those places EARLIER ? !! It's pretty obvious that they're shelling places now just to convince Americans that we're not helpless in Iraq--but we largely ARE helpless before the guerilla attacks.
What counts is which way the ordinary Iraqi jumps--to our side, to help us catch terrorists, OR to the other side. CIA says that more and more Iraqis are moving to support the guerillas !
|
Gen.Abizaid says there are only 5000 guerillas fighting against us./CoxNEWSSVC14NOV/ But Wm.Buckley noted that there are 500,000 former Saddamite soldiers who never surrendered, and who are highly trained soldiers. /Ft.CollinsWkly. (These men are angry because Bremer dumbly fired them all when he first arrived.)
There are also the Iraqi CIVILIANS who have joined the guerillas, enraged by Yank atrocities against their relatives./ Nor does Abizaid count the Muslim fanatics streaming in from other countries, eager to die while killing Yanks.
CIA estimates guerilla-supporters number up to 50,000 ! /Guardian13NOV.
|
If Abizaid is right, this is NOT good news, that 5000 guerillas can cause all that trouble against 150,000 U.S. troops!
|
In spite of Bush's cheery statements ("We have a strategy to handle these killers' and so on)..the number of Americans who see that the campaign is 'going badly' has risen from 43% to 50%; the number who see it's going 'VERY badly' has nearly doubled, rising from 12% to 22%./CBS poll.
----------------
Almost all Americans (87%) say the Bushis 'portrayed Iraq as an imminent threat' before the war..in other words, our populace's support for the war was based on
FALSE INFORMATION. /r.mtn.news/14nov.
Now half the people say the war is going badly.
|
A failing campaign that was based on lies to begin with...you'd think most Americans would now say, "Cut our losses and pull out!" But only half say that now.
However, the tendency is for more and more every month to say 'Pull out!" Only inertia preserves much support for the goofy project.
|
The Bushies now say they'll move very quickly to a 'legitimate' interim govt., but that our troops will remain even after that. The remaining troops will likely go on committing offensive actions against civilians. What makes the Bushies think the guerillas will kill/maim fewer GIs then? The Bushies are flailing around desperately.

BETTER INTELLIGENCE? The CIA says the Iraq guerillas have very good intelligence on the movements and plans of the Americans--[USATODAY13NOV]
Why wouldn't they, with Americans unable to screen their thousands of employees? [
[Almost none of the Yanks--leaders or GIs--speak the local language!]
And of course the Yanks have very poor intelligence to identify and locate the guerillas. Such intelligence would have to depend on natives who side with the U.S. and don't fear retaliation from the guerillas--and there are plenty of natives who'd be glad to give us FALSE intelligence, either to help the guerillas or just to finger their enemies to be destroyed by ignorant Yanks.
Who couldn't have foreseen this situation?
|
When the Bushies talk about 'speeding the transition to Iraq self-government", read:
BUGOUT!

MALE POWER & MALE WEAKNESS: Which men should we count as really powerful and strong? Which should we count as weak and pathetic?
-----------------------------
Many species of pack/herd/flock animals have a hierarchy based on PROFICIENCY AT X--the ability to do something VITAL better than rivals can.
|
Usually the 'alpha-male winners' excel at some form of combat or, more commonly, ritualized aggressive display--or, in the case of male peacocks, gorgeous display. The winners have more chances to mate, and leave more offspring with their genes.
Now 'the hen is the egg's way to make another egg'; the animal is, as it were, manipulated to WANT to act in ways that will best duplicate its special genes. So each animal WANTS intensely to excel at the 'alpha' activity, whatever that is for each species. Every herd-member knows exactly what activity one must excel in to be an 'alpha'.
|
Humans are similar. In every career-line, from boxing to being a philosophy prof, people who can do the activity central to that career better are the 'alphas'. And people care intensely about being splendid 'alphas', not pathetic losers.
|
The problem with male humans is that there are many, many different activities that may seem, to different people, like the important activity that counts: performing (singing? dancing? making comedy?), running, fighting, thinking & writing (about politics? science? literature?). For several millennia, acquiring land or wealth somehow has been widely--not universally--revered (as a sign of some other important proficiency? or just by itself?)
So people are confused about which activity 'counts', and therefore about which line of proficiency (able to do X well) they should care about.
|
Well, which activity enables a male human to get a mate easier and to maximally duplicate his genes? That would probably be the activity most male humans WANT to excel at, count as important. (discounting the influence of purely social, non-biological pressures).Once again, in primitive societies, big, aggressive mesomorphs seem automatically advantaged, excelling at fighting and aggressive display.
|
There is another source of human confusion. Humans are animals that change their own world at incredible speed (compared to the speed of genetic change). So a proficiency that maximizes one's gene-duplication in a primitive society (e.g., gigantic size and strength) might NOT do so in a later, more 'advanced' society (the gun is now the 'great equalizer'; the giant is an easier target than the small man; the person--male or female--who can operate well a huge machine is more powerful--(in this sense; he/she can produce far more results that others will pay for)--than a man with muscles, however gigantic.)
|
But our standards of admiration (partly hard-wired into us, perhaps) change much more slowly than the situation changes which determines which powers, which activities are more 'socially valuable'. (Perhaps because 'hard-wiring' changes with glacier-slowness; also because CULTURAL change is quite slow.)
|
This is true even of fighting: In Homer's ILIAD, what counted was individual prowess with shield and spear. By Socrates' time, what determined a society's success/failure in war--which in turn determined if you would be a slave with few surviving offspring, or a slave-master with many--this determinant was (a) brainy strategy--Admiral Themistocles outwitted and destroyed a huge Persian navy--and (b) on a more pedestrian level, excelling as a hoplite--requiring a considerably different set of talents and training from those needed for 'heroic' spear/shield fighting.
And yet Homer's outdated writings were still the 'bible', in Socrates' time, for setting Athenian standards for admiration among the young--outdated standards which then were dysfunctional.
|
Plato's great crusade was to 'update' admiration-standards sensibly. For instance, he noted that in every war, half the attacked population, the women, ran into the temple screaming, instead of joining their men in the fight. So he proposed that brave women should be trained to fight..a city with this one reform would double its fighting force automatically.
But that would entail, in Greece, older women exercising naked..that was 'obviously' an ugly and ridiculous idea. But, says Plato, non-Greeks thought that older MEN exercising naked was also ugly,ridiculous. But Greeks see that this latter custom is useful, so they don't see it that way. "Whatever is useful should be seen as splendid," says Plato; "Whatever is harmful should be seen as ugly and ridiculous."
|
Such sensible standard-reform would be great, but it's not going to happen in any easy way. Our own admiration-standards today are wildly outdated and dysfunctional.
[Let's skip over our absolutely insane standards: admiring killers and criminals and finding cannibals interesting...or electing as governors a body-builder and a professional 'rassler!] Let's just discuss our MILDLY-dysfunctional admirations.
|
All other things equal, tall people (male or female) get paid more, get promoted to executive jobs oftener; fat people don't get promoted; 'good-looking' (square-jaw, etc.) male profs get better evaluations. (even though tallness, thinness, good looks do not indicate the proficiencies which are relevant to career-performance.)
|
And, quite revealingly,(one study showed) women who are NOT near their ovulation-time prefer less rugged-looking male faces (e.g., Leonard deCaprio-types) --but as they near ovulation-time, they see rugged faces as more handsome (Jack Palance). That seems to indicate that they tend to marry tame males likely to support the children well; but then they are tempted to adultery (with hyper-males) when they're ready to conceive. (Such female strategies are found in many 'monogamist' species.)
Each set of narcissist genes are still 'trying to manipulate' people to behave in a way that will duplicate these genes maximally; but HUMAN genes are stupidly old-fashioned, going by performance-standards perhaps 6000 years old. Men with rugged faces are NOT AS SUCH better suited to protect and support children today.
Many males of other 'monogomous' species are suckers enough to care for children which are not their own--but a suspicious ('De Caprio') human male today can wangle a cheap DNA test of his purported (Palance-type) children to avoid this. (So far, legally, he has to support children who are from his wife but not his..but this could soon change.)
|
High-levels of testosterone are today probably harmful to passing-on-genes. Hyper-males are more likely to die young in cars or in gun-fights or in wars; they are more apt to be quarrelsome in a way that harms their work-team performance--especially if they have to work with, and compete with women.
----------
What occasioned this essay: men can now get testosterone upgrades easily; one form is just a gel you rub on your back. USATODAY13NOV says that the number of testosterone
PRESCRIPTIONS has multiplied by 300% (3 times what it was) SINCE 1999! (Men who wangle these prescriptions from their doctors may tell themselves that this stuff improves their general health--but top medical authorities just reminded everyone that there is NO EVIDENCE of such benefits, and there are obvious possible ways testosterone could harm your health--e.g., by increasing chances of prostate cancer ! )
|
Plato noted that WHAT IS ADMIRED WILL BE IMITATED. Admiration is not free; it has social costs or benefits.
|
More on this in two books:
STRUTTING & FRETTING: STANDARDS FOR SELF-ESTEEM by Jann Benson & Dan Lyons (available in CSU Morgan Library, in CSU philosophy library, and in other places by interlibrary loan).
DEMOCRACY, RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS (CH.1 & 2) by Dan Lyons, available in Morgan Library, phil. library, and by interlibrary loan.
|
WHO ARE THE ALPHA WOMEN? That's a much tougher question, not addressed here.
|
DISCUSSION WELCOMED. (Click on COMMENT below.)

EMERGENCY: CIA says insurgents gaining in strength, coordination, with possible spread from central Iraq to North and South, among Shiites & Kurds, not just Sunnis.. They have (of course!) better intelligence than U.S., and are gaining more recruits as Iraqis begin to think we will fail. For reconstruction, we count on contractors and NonGovtOrgs--who are fleeing the country. Bremer, rushed home, agrees with CIA, says he can't function if insurgency gets worse.
|
Rumsfeld & Cheney want to cut the number of our troops; they deny this is 'cut & run' strategy--but it clearly contradicts Bush's fatuous dream of using Iraq to remake MiddleEast into a utopia!
|
Suggested: a provisional govt. by Spring 04 or summer...but 'not a whisper' of any equivalent of charismatic, unifying leader like Kharzai in Afgh. [& Kharzai is merely 'mayor of Kabul', with little power outside the city.]
|
US was going to appoint a constitutional convention; but a Shiite honcho cleric issued a FATWA demanding an elected const.conv (where Shiite majority would dominate). That would postpone a constitution for 3 years. /FinTimes12nov/ What to do?
We're going to bug out. So, the sooner the better, the later the worse!

AN OLD, DUMB ARGUMENT: [my letter to be printed this week in FT.COLLINS WEEKLY]:
--------------------
In a recent column, Wm.Buckley (the reputed right-wing intellectual) presents
a tired, dumb argument for continuing the war, in spite of disasters like the downing of the Chinook copter full of GIs. Right off, he admits that if his kid died that way, his life would be destroyed.
He also admits we may face 500,000 Saddamite guerillas trained to fire shoulder-missiles. He also says that tranquillity will come 'only after the training of a new Iraqi army and..a plausible Iraqi government engendering loyalty from Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds.'--that is, not until two weeks after the coming of theMessiah.
|
But then Buckley comes back pluckily. After all, our 400 casualties (he counts only the dead, not the thousands of maimed or wounded GIs)--the 400 number is tiny COMPARED TO:
--16,000 Americans murdered last year, and
--43,000 killed by autos last year.
------------------
REFLECTIONS:
|--As I understand it, the '400' number is to be ADDED to the number of Americans murdered and slaughtered on our highways--the military casualties can't be SUBSTITUTED for that other number.
--The number of our casualties is awful, and increasing at a rising rate.
WHAT THE HELL have the other numbers got to do with that? Why not add in also the millions of Americans who die of heart trouble?
-------------
Then Buckley says, (no kidding!): IF we could leap ahead in time to the future when Iraq is a settled state, governed by its own people making their way to freedom (again, right after the Messiah!) then we'd be sure this utopia was worth the cost in U.S. casualties.
|
HOWEVER:
--the families of GIs killed or maimed might even then NOT agree that this utopia was worth 'the cost'.
--We might find in that future state that the total number of GIs killed/maimed/ wounded is far higher than it is now;
--we might well find, at that future date,that our bungling regime (before we bugged out) has resulted in semi-permanent civil war between Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds--with Turkey also perhaps involved.

-----------
Buckley's argument is so dumb one wonders if perhaps he is talking on the surface to his yahoo fans, but is really showing why we should get the hell out now.

THE RESIDUE: Half of Americans have come awake, and now say, "BRING'EMHOME!'
But the remaining war-supporters may be hard-core. Many white males would follow Bush to Hell--and, if God is just, they will.

EMERGENCY: Top Bushies held meeting (with Bremer rushed home); disillusion with their puppet Council at not moving fast toward 'Constitution'. (Council members complain that Bremer has basically ignored them.)
Now the Bushies are thinking of substituting a 'provisional govt' (like that in Afghanistan, whose writ doesn't run outside Kabul?) which could then hold elections in 4-6 months! /Reuters12NOV
Of course Bushies say this is not an 'exit strategy'...but it OBVIOUSLY IS AN EXIT STRATEGY. Hosanna.

ATTACK VS. ITALIANS: A dozen or so Italian MPs were blown up in a Southern Iraq town (outside the Sunni triangle, in usually-peaceful Shia terrritory). /REUTERS12NOV
In the short run, this will enrage Italians to support their involvement--but all along, 2 in 3 Italians opposed our invasion (one million marched to protest it in Rome!).
The Pope condemned the invasion as 'unjust, illegal, and disastrous.'
Berlusconi arrogantly sent in the 2300 Italians over his people's objections.
Sooner or later, Italians will turn against their involvement in Iraq. That of course is what guerillas classically aim at: peeling off all collaborators and allies from the Invader.
CNN HEADLINE: U.S. ALLIES LEAVE IRAQ AS DEATH TOLL SKYROCKETS.(13NOV)
That guerilla aim seems to be getting fulfilled.
-----------
Berlusconi's flunky said promptly that this attack was by 'Saddam's loyalists.' /Reuters12nov
But suicide-bombing is untypical of these Baathists; as someone says, 'Who would commit suicide for Saddam?!"
These Italian flunkies, like Bush-team, don't want to admit that our Iraq invasion has roused Muslim fanatics from many countries, eager to die in killing Americans or their allies.

my letter PRINTED IN USATODAY 12NOV (largest-circulation paper in U.S.):
DISILLUSION IS SIMILAR: Your editorial noted several false parallels between Iraq & Vietnam, but ignored the main similarity.
In each case,Americans were easily whipped into war frenzy-but as the excitement waned and U.S. casualties mounted, Americans remembered they had no stake in the foolish conflict and sensibly began to think of pulling out.

ARAB RAGE: Arafat's security chief just made an extraordinarily rash statement:
"U.S. is biased and DISRESPECTFUL of Arabs. This requires an Arab stand uniting all capabilities to face Americans behaving as if they ruled the world and speaking the language of police and new imperialism." / reuters12nov
Some reflections:
--U.S., or rather Bush-team, HAS spoken as if they ruled the world, the language of new imperialism (in document of Sept. 02).
--U.S. doglike obedience to Sharon has roused all enemies of Israel against our Iraq project.

ANTI-GUERILLA SUCCESS: In the town of Ramadi, once a hell-hole of guerilla attacks, things are much better now, thanks to the good sense of the U.S. colonel there, who had been a Miami policeman. The officers talk and talk with local chiefs, over huge banquets.(thru super-competent translators?) But they complain about 'King'Bremer's team, who talk about reconstruction but achieve very little. /GUARDIAN11NOV.

ARE IRAQIS BETTER OFF WITHOUT SADDAM? Not physically! A medical report from a charity called MEDACT lists many ways (violently from,e.g., unexploded munitions) and (nonviolently,e.g., from hunger and filthy water) that Iraqis are WORSE OFF under U.S. 'liberation'./GUARDIAN11NOV

EUROPE VS.INVASION: Rummy tried to pretend we had 'NEW EUROPE' [Eastern Europe] vs. 'Old Europe' [e.g., France,Germany] on our side--but actually there is more agreement vs. invasion between the '2 Europes' than there is on European Union! / LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE3nov

BUSHIES DANGEROUS FOR TRANSNATIONALS! /The preeminent business-risk firm, CONTROL RISK, says that Bush foreign policy introduces new risks to big corporations.
In fact, it is the 'single factor driving development of global risk'. (But C.R. backs away from saying Bushies have made the world more dangerous.)
There is a new wave of popular resentment of U.S., in new parts of the world.
Muslim boycotts (worldwide) of U.S. brands are re-invigorated.
Risks have risen markedly in last year (year of Iraq adventure).
Risky countries have risen from 64 to 81.
But never mind, the world's DEFENSE INDUSTRIES are coming out ahead./FinTimes11NOV.
|
I can see why average dim Republican glories in Pentagon spending and strutting; but it's puzzling why huge NON-defense corporations (like COCA-COLA) stand still for the damage they suffer from frothing Bushie militarism!

NOT TRIVIAL? Our Gen.Myers bragged that we had recently captured 6000 weapons in Iraq.."That is no trivial matter ! "/WashPost11NOV/
There are 800,000 TONS of weapons & ammo lying loose around Iraq; we can't even guard the weapons we confiscate.
|
This kind of bragging is like the economic bragging about indices that 'seem to predict' an increase in jobs available. I'll wait to celebrate when the jobs actually show up.
|
Similarly, we shouldn't celebrate about all these 'good omens' until the number of guerilla attacks actually drops (vs. GIs OR vs. 'our' collaborators).(That number has SURGED recently ! )
The Pentagon recently said number of GIS will drop to 105,000 by May; also that the number of IRAQI security people will exceed number of GIs.
Rumsfeld: "Our commanders say the insurgency is under control. Our goal is NOT to reduce # of GIs. Our only exit strategy is success. It's that simple." Sure it is. /Reuters11NOV
|
The Iraq/guerilla situation reminds one of a famous theological poem:
God made things great in the Beginning;
Adam ruined things by sinning;
We hope that the story
Will end in God's Glory--
BUT SO FAR THE OTHER SIDE'S WINNING!

HUMILIATION, says Thos.Friedman. is "The single most unappreciated force in international relations."
=============to T.Friedman:
you note well that much of our trouble in the MiddleEast is from our ignoring the powerful fear of humiliation among the people there.
Americans have a strange attitude toward humiliation and the standards of honor.
|
American males, especially, feel horror at humiliation: a surprising number commit murder, then suicide, if their woman drops them. And one Presidential candidate (Muskie) was discredited as a 'real man'--and a candidate--when he wept once, for very good reasons, publicly. / U.S is finally moving against bullying when some
humiliated victims have started to shoot up the school !
|
Though we feel and fear humilation intensely, we cannot, oddly enough, talk about it! I co-authored a book on the subject: STRUTTING AND FRETTING: STANDARDS FOR SELF-ESTEEM. One reason it got nowhere, I think, is that it dared to say that sometimes low self-esteem (humiliation) was warranted under our social standards.(If it had just told people how to BOLSTER their self-esteem, the book might have prospered.)
A very intelligent Jewish-American friend was puzzled why the Palestinians had rejected the Clinton plan. Muslims had told me they were insulted by the way the proposed map was speckled with Jewish settlements. He said, "OK, why didn't they negotiate changes?" He couldn't understand that dishonor cannot, sometimes, be negotiated.
|
So you have Americans who can't discuss humiliation, and don't even let themselves think about it (if the threat to their own psyche isn't imminent)--such a people are imposing occupation on a people for whom humiliation is a very live issue.
----------
But our problem won't be solved a crash-course in the logic and psychology of humiliation.
The deeper problem is this: Americans--including most of our political elite!--are a very peculiar and insular people; we don't even try to understand ANY pyschology of people different from ourselves.
|
Put very simply: why does an ignorant, arrogant people like ourselves feel qualified to 'remake the Middle East' in a utopian way, as you dream we should be doing? We have blundered into enraging some significant portion of one billion Muslims worldwide. There is likely nothing we can do to pacify these angry people in the near future.
We should for now retreat into Fortress America and spend our money and our energy in trying to patch up the spots in our society that are shockingly vulnerable to terrorist attack.
|
It's nonsensical to say that since 9/11 we see that we MUST intervene overseas. That purported Necessity doesn't at all increase the Possibility that we can intervene intelligently. As Graham Greene showed in THE QUIET AMERICAN, U.S. policy could be described this way: wild, myopic, inteventionist lunges based on ignorant isolationist thinking.

WE DON'T COUNT THE WOUNDED.
The Bush-team won't let pictures of returning coffins be taken for TV. But even more shamelessly, they're counting on the American tendency not to count the wounded, to think that a wound is just a slight problem. (Flak-jackets protect the torso, minimize deaths, but the price of survival is serious burns or maiming or wounding of the limbs and head.)
|
Only seriously wounded GIs are airlifted to U.S, through Andrews AirForce Base.
Seventy-Five Hundred have been airlifted there since April. (LATIMES,10NOV)One in five of the wounded (over one thousand) have serious brain damage--a fate, perhaps, worse than death. 7 in 10 have an injury that could affect the spine or brain.
|
It's too bad that our rulers are also cutting budgets for Veterans' Hospitals, where many of these GIs may spend years or their whole life.

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: The new bombing in Ryadh shows that AlQuaeda is out seriously to overthrow the (corrupt) Saudi Royals. And our Bush-team now says they won't stand any longer for authoritarian regimes in the MiddleEast.
We once backed bin Laden to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan (as we once backed Saddam against Iran). Perhaps we'll back Osama again to drive out the Royals !
--------
Our 'zero-tolerance' of tyrants may come a little late. The Saudi Royal Family is said to have moved almost ONE MILLION MILLIONS OF DOLLARS out of the country already. / USATODAY11NOV.

PANTS ON FIRE! A former top CIA analyst (directly advised Kissinger, wrote daily briefing for Reagan) says "We were dubious, but we thought the President couldn't be lying so blatantly ! "
"But no President has ever lied so boldly, so often, so obviously..now we must presume that whatever he says is a lie!" (Even Lyndon Johnson's lies were not so cold, so premeditated.)
The lasting damage is to the trust needed by U.S. Intelligence agencies."With intelligence agencies, as with virgins, damage cannot be easily repaired. Watching Iraq was like watching your daughter being raped."
This Ray McGovern has helped found VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY (VIPS for short.) /LondonINDEPENDENT10NOV
-----------
Lyons: Clinton lied about private sex; Bush lies led us into awful war. Yet Bush fans think that Bush, not CLinton, shows character! What he displays is not guts, but gall.

ADVANCE WARNING (IGNORED) OF THIS GUERILLA WAR:
Scott Ritter, former UN inspector for WMDs , says that, in Saddamite HQ, he found clear evidence before the war of detailed and extensive plans to use 'Improvised Explosive Devices' against invaders--and that he notified U.S. intelligence of this./Christ.Sci.Monitor10NOV
--The Iraq govt. was right that the UN inspectors were also spies facilitating the U.S. invasion.
--The Bush-team should have known they would face this kind of guerilla war after their 'victory'; they should have prepared for it (which they didn't)
--OR,even smarter, they should have cancelled the invasion, rather than face a kind of war we're inept at.

GUERILLAS MUST ALSO 'SLOG ON':
U.S. hawks now say (as they did in Viet fiasco) "Maybe we shouldn't have invaded Iraq; but now we can't back out without world contempt."
|
Such logic makes much more sense from the other side:
I can imagine a sensible Iraqi deploring the start of the guerilla war, likely as it was to provoke much violence from American invaders. But what now? He might say, "The Yanks are already fixed in hostility toward us--for God's sake, they're BOMBING us again! And we can't stop the guerillas from attacking. AND there's a good chance the invaders can be driven out--
so we must all now back the guerillas! ..even back the Baathists! It's now a fight to the death."
|
Of course this is a fight to THEIR death--and to our lasting disgrace.

ANARCHY ! Baghdad is filling up with foreign mercenaries from various countries, serving as bodyguards for the rich and powerful. /Reuters10nov/ This (a) shows lack of faith in U.S. troops as enforcers of law'norder, and (b) enrages Iraqis further at the U.S., because of these alien thugs and cowboys inflicted on their society. The place is getting more chaotic, like Liberia or the Congo.
----------
GIs shot a deputy mayor APPOINTED BY US! As usual, Army spokesman said the victim attacked GIs first. Eyewitnesses said this didn't happen, and the customary protest rally formed immediately./Reuters10NOV/
Whatever really happened, you can bet the 'eyewitness' accounts will be believed.
|
UPDATE: Now U.S. spokesmen admit the poor deputy mayor didn't ATTACK the GI; what he did was to TALK BACK to him. So the shooting is OK. /USATODAY11NOV.

BOMBING INEVITABLE--BUT SMART? After the helicopter was downed near Falluja (what the hell was it doing flying over Falluja? !) it was inevitable that U.S. would bomb the place, to assure Americans at home that we aren't helpless in the face of guerillas.
|
This is a classic example of collective punishment, of an awesomely armed 'Empire' striking at the 'sea' of peasants who conceal the 'fish' of guerillas. (Nazis killed every man in Lidice after a Nazi officer was murdered.)
|
U.S. officers have threatened more bombing; this could conceivably work to intimidate the peasants to quit supporting guerillas.
|
However, this tactic didn't work in Vietnam; it hasn't stopped guerilla attacks in Chechnya or Afghanistan. It hasn't stopped attacks in Palestine--these Israeli attacks are pretty well-focussed: e.g., destroying homes of families of known suicide-bombers..but even so, the destruction hasn't worked--as a top Israeli general just said, defying Sharon.
|
Natives are often too dumb to be scared off by such insulting attacks--which treat the natives like vermin to be exterminated. In Falluja, a woman said she once welcomed the GIs; her son silenced her: "Bush is a dog and the son of a dog." /Reuters10nov
|
U.S. attacks can't be focussed; we don't speak the language! We don't know who the guerillas are; our main weapon (perhaps our sole weapon)is long-distance bombing. (Close helicopter attacks are less attractive now that copters get shot down by rifle-grenades or shoulder-missiles; and our awesome tanks can be blown up by land-mines.)
|
The only test of success of this tried-and-UNtrue tactic will be if the number of attacks drop from this region--however, if the guerillas start operating just as effectively somewhere else--if the attacks indeed increase!--then the renewed-bombing tactic will have failed.