Patriot Missive » World Wonders

Petraeus Party Crashes Lebanon

Ms. Missive — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 06:06:45 +0000

Gen. David Petraeus (of “The Surge” fame) found his way to Lebanon yesterday and met with the pro-American government heads including Lebanese President Michel Suleiman. (Not those meany head Hezbollah. I bight my thumb at you, sirs!)

The DEBKAfile reports Petraeus visited “to check out the strategic ramifications of Hizballah’s seizure on behalf of Syria and Iran of two strategic Lebanese peaks, Mt. Sannine and Mt. Barukh”. (Quoted from an unknown military source.)

hmmm…Let me get this straight: A four star general… commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq… one month away from being promoted to Central Command Chief… mastermind of the famous “Surge” (at this point, no one really argues that it didn’t have a positive effect in Iraq) made an unannounced visit to Lebanon to check out a few mountains?

Maybe they have a nice view. Can’t blame a man for wanting a little vacation.

Anyway, the moral of the story is we can’t always trust our news sources. Excuse me while get back to my daily dose of FOX.

A Dose of Middle Eastern Irony

Ms. Missive — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 07:06:25 +0000

No camels were hurt in the making of this film….. except for their egos.

Pack Your Hijab! Iraq is Going to the Olympics!

Ms. Missive — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 10:19:12 +0000

Originally banned from the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, the International Olympics Committee has made an exception for Iraq. What’s the catch, you ask? Iraq has sworn to hold free elections for their Olympics committee which was what originally caused alarm for the international committee.

I present to you, the 2008 Iraqi Olympics Team. No photographs, please.

[photo]

I wanna see thumbs with purple ink spots, damnit.

Saudi Fighter Airplane Crashes

Ms. Missive — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 14:48:11 +0000

Don’t blink…..

source

Another cease-fire signed in Sadr City

Skitz M. Jones — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:20:16 +0000

From the Chicago Sun-Times

Representatives of firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and lawmakers from Iraq’s main Shiite political bloc signed a four-day cease-fire Monday in an effort to end seven weeks of fighting in Baghdad’s Sadr City slum.

It was unclear if the agreement would be respected by all the extremists who have been fighting in Sadr City. Al-Sadr is thought to have influence over some of the militants, but not all of them. Many of those fighting Iraqi and U.S. forces are thought to have splintered away from al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army.

The U.S. military has repeatedly said its clashes are with rogue elements of al-Sadr’s militia and that the majority of the 60,000-strong Mahdi Army did not openly participate in the fighting, adhering to a general cease-fire ordered last August by al-Sadr.

The fighting was concentrated mostly in the southern part of the Shiite slum that is home to about 2.5 million people, and Iraqi officials have reported that hundreds of people have died in the fighting.

Clashes began in late March after militants responded to a crackdown by Iraqi troops in Sadr City by firing hundreds of mortars and rockets at the heavily fortified Green Zone housing the government and Western embassies.

Al-Attiyah said the cease-fire went into effect on Sunday and Iraqi forces will be allowed to enter the area as early as Wednesday and ‘‘take over the security there.’’

The statement said ‘‘the government will decide on the number of Iraqi forces to be deployed in Sadr City to achieve security, in order to refrain from asking help from foreign forces,’’ a reference to the U.S. military.

‘‘Any attack against residential areas, government offices and the Green Zone are prohibited from Sadr City or from another area,’’ the agreement said.

The cease-fire stipulates that Iraqi forces have the right to ‘‘impose the law and to pursue illegal situations.’’

‘‘No one and no side has the right to interfere in the work of these forces,’’ it said, adding that the government retained the right to pursue ‘‘those who carried out armed attacks against the government.’’

‘‘We have agreed on cease-fire and to end displaying arms in public,’’ al-Obeidi said. ‘‘But we did not agree on disbanding the Mahdi Army to hand over its weapons.

The head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, may or may not be captured/dead for the 3rd time.

Skitz M. Jones — Fri, 09 May 2008 11:26:47 +0000

No wonder we’re having such trouble finding bin-Laden (assuming anyone is really looking for the guy anymore) we can’t even really figure out if we’ve killed or captured a guy, when his is or isn’t in our presence. We’re not really sure to tell the truth. Confused? I know I am.

Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the head of al Qaeda in Iraq, has not been captured, a senior U.S. military official told CNN on Friday.

Iraqi authorities said Thursday that al-Masri had been captured in Mosul.

U.S. military officials were surprised about the report of Abu Ayyub al-Masri’s capture — first reported by Iraqi media and picked up by The Associated Press. And intelligence officials said they were skeptical, even though Iraqi officials said al-Masri was already in U.S. military custody.

Al-Masri (”the Egyptian”), also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, took the reins of the Iraqi al Qaeda offshoot in June 2006 after a U.S. missile strike killed his predecessor, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Since then, Iraqi officials have reported his death three times, his capture twice and a mortal wounding once.

So either the guy is a zombie, a magician, a figment of our imaginations, or- all these intellegence officials are completely lacking in intellegence. Which do you think it is?

Iraqi officials have also misreported the deaths or capture of other high-ranking insurgents, Baathists or others, including al-Zarqawi before he was killed and Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, the highest ranking former member of Saddam Hussein’s regime still at large.

Al-Duri, who was the King of Clubs (No. 6) on the U.S. military’s deck of most wanted regime officials, was most recently reported captured two weeks ago by multiple Iraqi officials. He had previously been reported killed in 2005 and captured the year before.

Wow… kinda helps you sleep at night knowing the Keystone Cops are working in conjuntion with Mr. Magoo to keep Iraq, and the rest of the world, safe and secure- doesn’t it?

N. Korea helping Syria build nuclear reactor?

Skitz M. Jones — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:23:00 +0000

Yes, so it would seem. The Bush admin released photographic evidence of a nuclear reactor built in Syria, reportedly with the aid of N. Korea, who for most of the Bush Presidency was considered under the rule of Kim Jong-Il to be a terrorist state, dangerous to the world… while also being largely ignored and un-f**ked with, because it was known that unlike say… Iraq?… N. Korea actually had the weapons capabilities to seriously attack the U.S. at any given moment. We’re talking nukes here people.

That stance had been softening as of last year as the Bush admin worked to secure some sort of deal with N. Korea that would see the N. Korean gov’t disclosing all nuclear activities and to an extent de-arming, and the U.S. in exchange lightening up on sanctions and possibly beginning to work with the country.

The crucial question now is how the North Koreans will react. Some officials said they hoped it would embarrass the North Koreans into admitting to nuclear proliferation activities and others said that it could prompt them to walk away from the negotiating table - and collapse the deal Bush was hoping to reach by the end of his presidency. In return for North Korea’s declaring all its nuclear activities, the United States would lift sanctions and begin to negotiate the prize for North Korea’s turning over its fuel and weapons.

It also raises the possibility of new tensions with Syria, as the White House accused the Syrian government on Thursday of a “cover-up” consistent with a government that “supports terrorism, takes action that destabilizes Lebanon” and allows militants to enter Iraq.

Only selected pictures were released by the intelligence agencies on Thursday, including a video that combined still photos and drawings and had a voice-over that gave the presentation the feel of a Cold War news reel about the Korean War. In fact, it was intended in part, officials said, to try to draw that war - in which the United States and North Korea never signed a peace treaty - to a close.

Inside the administration, the battle over whether to try to strike a deal with North Korea or keep it under sanctions in hopes of triggering its collapse continues into the last months of the Bush presidency.

At the CIA, Admiral Michael Hayden, the agency’s director, told employees Thursday that they should “take heart because our team effort on the Al Kibar reactor is a case study in rigorous analytic tradecraft, skillful human and technical collection, and close collaboration.”

But even this victory, some experts note, raises questions about the agency’s focus. The reactor was built within 100 miles, or 160 kilometers, of the Iraqi border yet never identified, even though the administration was searching for any form of such weapons programs over the border.

Moreover, even some senior officials of the Bush administration acknowledge that they are likely to leave Bush’s successor with a North Korea that has roughly 10 nuclear weapons or fuel for weapons, up from the one or two weapons that Bush inherited.

“I’d say the score is Kim Jong Il eight, and Bush zero,” said Graham Allison, a Harvard professor and author of “Nuclear Terrorism,” who was in Washington Thursday to testify about Iran’s nuclear program. “And if you can build a reactor in Syria without being detected for eight years, how hard can it be to sell a little plutonium to Osama bin Laden?”

So what we’re really looking at here is another case of the world becoming and EVEN MORE dangerous place during the Bush Presidency, than it had been prior. And with so much focus and resources sunk into the war in Iraq, just like the worsening conditions along the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan (which, if you’ll remember is where the terrorists who actually attacked us really hang out), N. Korea and Syria (as mentioned above- only 100 miles outside of the Iraqi border) are increasing their nuclear capabilities. How’s that for Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Anyone else get that sinking feeling in the pit of their stomach?

China Becomes More American Every Day

Ms. Missive — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:22:44 +0000

Get this.

Apparently, CNN hurt China’s feelings and China’s taking it to the courts. Just like any red blooded American, they’re gonna sue:

Cafferty said the United States imported Chinese-made “junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food” and added: “They’re basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they’ve been for the last 50 years”.

Amusingly, they’ve worked out a sum of $1.3 billion. That works out to $1 per Chinese citizen. Don’t spend it all at one place.

Army Deployments Cut Back To 12 Months: Too Little Too Late?

Ms. Missive — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:25:26 +0000

With the success of the troop surge in Iraq (so says Gen. Petraeus), President Bush has decided to give the troops a break. He’s ordered a deployment cut back from 15 months to 12 months.

Whoop-de-friggin’-do.

A few things to consider:

The 12 month combat tours won’t take affect until August, 2008. Too bad, so sad for all the soldiers in the desert right now who still have to complete their 15 months tours.

It’s also interesting to note that the “new” deployment tours take affect only a few months before a new president moves into the White House. That translates into troop availability not being affected until August 2009. This could potentially be a move to disable options available to the new president who may not have as much flexibility with troop increases or decreases.

And another point made by Phillip Carter at the Washington Post who argues that the 12 month long Army deployments are still too long:

This is an extremely long deployment, particularly for troops engaged in dangerous work outside the wire and away from the comforts of large U.S. bases. The combat-stress literature suggests there is a finite limit to the quantity of combat an individual can experience before he/she breaks down and becomes “combat ineffective.” For sustained major combat operations, like Guadalcanal or the Hurtgen Forest, that figure is 60 days or so. We don’t know exactly what the figure is for sustained counterinsurgency operations of the sort practiced in Baghdad or Baqubah. But there is a limit. And the most recent mental health survey statistics from the Pentagon indicate that we are rapidly pushing our soldiers and Marines toward it — and beyond — in order to sustain the force in Iraq.

It’s apparent the damage is done for the troops who have completed both 12 and 15 month tours. Not to mention multiple deployments… many have completed three or more year long tours already. And at what cost? At the cost of “staying the coarse”?

Petraeus recommends neither increase or decrease in troop levels.

Skitz M. Jones — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:41:57 +0000

Nope, it’s more “stay the course” and “wait and see” from the man leading the way in Iraq Gen. David Petraeus.

So what exactly is going to happen in Iraq?

(Petraeus) was careful to emphasize that any withdrawals — after a recommended 45-day halt this summer — would be based on security conditions at the time, Petraeus’ acknowledgment went slightly further than his stubborn refusal Tuesday to discuss the level of U.S. troops after the July pause.

“I can foresee a reduction beyond the 15 [brigades], yes, sir,” Petraeus said, referring to the number of military units that will remain in Iraq once the surge ends in July. “We have a number of months and a number of substantial actions to take before then, but we are already identifying areas that we think are likely candidates for that.”

Of course that left some in the House Armed Services Committee with grave concerns.

Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the committee’s chairman, said U.S. military and intelligence leaders have argued any future terrorist attack is likely to come from Al Qaeda operatives based in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“When looking at the needs in Afghanistan, the effort in Iraq, however important, is putting at risk our ability to decisively defeat those most likely to attack us,” Skelton said.

So with the count of troops in Iraq not unlikely to remain the same through to the elections in November, what does this mean for the Cadidates?

For the presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, who has tethered his political fate to the war, the freeze could hurt or help him, said Julian Zelizer, a history and public affairs professor at Princeton University in New Jersey.

The U.S. military role in Iraq “will constantly remind voters about a Republican problem that is unpopular, controversial and seen as a policy failure,” Zelizer said. At the same time, Democrats shouldn’t assume the war issue will break their way.

“Americans often support hawks or military figures to get the nation out of messy wars,” he said, citing Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, who ended the Korean War in 1953, and Richard Nixon, who brought most U.S. forces home from Vietnam 20 years later.

Obama, Clinton

McCain and the two Democratic presidential candidates — Senators Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York — addressed Iraq yesterday as Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker appeared before two Senate committees.

Clinton, 60, said it was time to begin an “orderly process” of withdrawal. Obama said setting a timetable for a pullout would force Iraqi leaders to resolve sectarian disputes.

The Democratic rivals are responding to weak public support for the Iraq war. Sixty percent of all Americans favor setting a timetable for removing U.S. forces, while 35 percent support keeping a significant number of troops there until the situation improves, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll taken Feb. 21 through Feb. 24.

McCain, 71, reiterated his view that the U.S. troop buildup ordered by Bush last year has been a success and that a premature American withdrawal would be “reckless and irresponsible.”

No `Abyss’

“We’re no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success,” McCain said.

At the same time, McCain sought to refute Democratic criticisms that he supported an unlimited U.S. commitment and was overly optimistic about the course of the conflict.

McCain said his goal was “an Iraq that no longer needs American troops.” And he elicited testimony from Petraeus that was critical of the performance of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki and Iraqi security forces in fighting against Shiite militias in Basra.

Clinton, like McCain a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, also used her moment in the spotlight to counter critics of her position on Iraq — in this case, McCain and his assertion that those supporting withdrawal were irresponsible.

“It might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again at such tremendous cost,” Clinton said.

The administration and its supporters “often talk about the cost of leaving Iraq, yet ignore the greater cost of continuing the same failed policy,” she said.

`Strategic Blunder’

Obama, 46, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said Bush’s decision to invade Iraq was a “massive strategic blunder.”

“Our military is overstretched and the Pentagon has acknowledged it,” he said. “When you have finite resources, you’ve got to define your goals tightly and modestly.”

One way or the other, with the economy recently being the focal point of election debate leaving all other issues as footnotes, Iraq is likely to get a fair amount of press in the near future.

Sadr offers to disband Mahdi Army*

Skitz M. Jones — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:24:32 +0000

*“if the highest Shi’ite religious authority demand it”.

It was the first time Sadr has offered to dissolve the Mehdi Army militia, whose black-masked fighters have been principle actors throughout Iraq’s five-year-old war and the main foes of U.S. and Iraqi forces in widespread battles over recent weeks.

The news came on the day Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who launched a crackdown on the militia late last month, ordered the Mehdi Army to disband or Sadr’s followers would be excluded from Iraqi political life.

Senior Sadr aide Hassan Zargani said Sadr would seek rulings from Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq’s most senior Shi’ite cleric, as well as senior Shi’ite clergy based in Iran, on whether to dissolve the Mehdi Army, and would obey their orders.

“If they order the Mehdi Army to disband, Moqtada al-Sadr and the Sadr movement will obey the orders of the religious leaders,” Zargani told Reuters from neighboring Iran, where U.S. officials say Sadr has spent most of the past year.

That puts the spotlight on the reclusive Sistani, 77, a cleric revered by all of Iraq’s Shi’ite factions and whose edicts carry the force of Islamic law.

Sistani, who almost never leaves his house in Najaf, has intervened in Iraqi politics only a handful of times but on each occasion his rulings have been decisive.

It speaks volumes for the state of things in Iraq and our considerable poor estimations and cultural misunderstandings that a feat we (including U.S. backed Iraq Prez Nuri Kamal al-Maliki) have been trying to accomplish for years could come to pass on the words of a reclusive cleric living in Iran- a country that our government has no love lost for.

The fighting in Basra and Baghdad has brought Iraq back into the headlines after a long stretch of relative calm following the surge strategy that was put in place as well as a cease-fire called for by Moqtada al-Sadr last year. With General Petraeus set to report to Washington again in the next few days, including face time with Presidential hopefuls Clinton, Obama, and McCain, it remains to be seen how the recent events will influence talks of withdrawing troops from Iraq, not to mention dialogue about the overall future of U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Protesters attempt to stop the Olympic torch.

Skitz M. Jones — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 02:01:15 +0000

There’s been much heat on China lately with the Olympics taking place there, and renued protests for a free Tibet, so with the Olympic torch passing through London security for the 31 mile stretch was heavy, but that didn’t stop some from trying to snuff the flame.

London police guarded the 31-mile route and escorted torchbearers as protesters of China’s human rights record and its involvement in Tibet tried to extinguish the flame, CNN reported.London police announced 15 arrests Sunday, but the relay passed by London’s Chinese embassy and the office of Prime Minister Gordon Brown without incident.

Brown noted the Dalai Lama resisted calls to boycott the Beijing Summer Games and refused to make a gesture of opposition against China during the torch relay.

Liberal Democratic Party leader Nick Clegg called the torch procession “wholly inappropriate,” saying “human rights are being systematically abused on an extraordinary scale in China,” the BBC reported.

There are also reports of a man attempting to grab the torch away from one of the carriers. This is one of the more high profile events to take place in protest of China’s being tapped to host the Olympics since Steven Speilberg stepped down as one of the event advisors some months ago. To date no athletes have joined in protesting the event, one which could carry as much political tension as Olympic events in 1936 when Berlin Germany played host.

Moktada al-Sadr calls for cease-fire in Basra

Skitz M. Jones — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 05:49:40 +0000

As reported earlier, the Mahdi army had been facing off against the Iraqi government and army in the city of Basra after the gov’t ordered the Shiite militia lay down their arms and staged a siege on the city.
Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, founder of the Mahdi army, on Sunday ordered the militia to cease fire, and submitted a list of demands to the gov’t.

The substance of Mr. Sadr’s statement, released Sunday afternoon, was hammered out in elaborate negotiations over the past few days with senior Iraqi officials, some of whom traveled to Iran to meet with Mr. Sadr, according to several officials involved in the discussions.

Still, though fighting was reported to have died down by late afternoon in Basra, it continued in Baghdad, including heavy combat by Iraqi and American troops and aircraft in the Mahdi Army stronghold of Sadr City, casting uncertainty on the deal.

The negotiations with Mr. Sadr were seen as a serious blow for Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, who had vowed that he would see the Basra campaign through to a military victory and who has been harshly criticized even within his own coalition for the stalled assault.

Last week, Iraq’s defense minister, Abdul Kadir al-Obeidi, conceded that the government’s military efforts in Basra have met with far more resistance than was expected. Many Iraqi politicians say that Mr. Maliki’s political capital has been severely depleted by the Basra campaign and that he is in the curious position of having to turn to Mr. Sadr, a longtime rival, for a way out.

And it was a chance for Mr. Sadr to flaunt his power, commanding both armed force and political strength that can forcefully challenge the other dominant Shiite parties, including Mr. Maliki’s Dawa movement and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. In the statement, Mr. Sadr told militia members “to end all military actions in Basra and in all the provinces” and “to cooperate with the government to achieve security.”

But Mr. Sadr also demanded concessions, including that the government grant a general amnesty for his followers, release all imprisoned members of the Sadrist movement who have not been convicted of crimes and bring back “the displaced people who have fled their homes as a result of military operations.”

It was not clear if the government was willing to meet those demands.

Mr. Sadr’s willingness to negotiate represents a significant shift from his stance in 2004, when he ordered his militia to fight to the death in the holy city of Najaf, and suggests that his political sophistication and strategic skills have grown in the last two years.

In response to all of the action in Basra and Baghdad American military forces have been launching airstrikes on strategic locations in neighborhoods, as well as sending armored vehicles on patrol. According to unofficial reports around 500 have been killed or injured as a result of the violence.

Could a break down into greater sectarian violence be on the horizon for Iraq?

Skitz M. Jones — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:21:26 +0000

Mahdi army militiamen are currently engaging Iraqi army and Iraqi government forces with greater frequency and intensity as of this week, as the government sent their troops in to wrest control of the city of Basra from the Shiite militia founded by Moktada al-Sadr.

Moktada al-Sadr is the Shiite cleric who called for the ceasefire last year that has helped in conjuncture with “the surge” to hold violence in Iraq to a lower level in recent memory.

Senior members of several political parties said Saturday that the operation, ordered by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, had been poorly planned. The growing discontent adds a new level of complication to the American-led effort to demonstrate that the Iraqi government had made strides toward being able to operate a functioning country and keep the peace without thousands of American troops.

Since the Basra assault began Tuesday, violence has spread to Shiite districts of Baghdad and other places in Iraq where Shiite militiamen hold sway, raising fears that security gains often attributed to a yearlong American troop buildup could be at risk. Any widespread breakdown of a cease-fire called by Moktada al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric who founded the Mahdi Army, could bring the country right back to the sectarian violence that racked it in 2006 and 2007.

There are many things that must be considered in regards to this series of events:

-How this affects the locals, many of whom already distrust the leadership of the current Prime Minister
-How this affects our military, troop actions, and withdrawls or increased numbers of troops
-And how this could influence the Presidential elections in regards to what candidates say they might or might not do to handle these kinds of situations in Iraq should they continue.

We’ll be sure to stay abreast of the situation, and report more as it plays out.

What to Expect When Watching Frontline: Bush’s War Part II

Ms. Missive — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:08:21 +0000

Here are a few things you’ll take away after watching part 2 of Bush’s War:

The military planning of the Iraq invasion never seriously took into account the amount of civilian unrest that would follow the ousting of Saddam.
Our government actually thought our military would be withdrawn from Iraq by December 2003. That’s eight months after the initial invasion.
We put all our eggs in the “weapons of mass destruction basket” and our strategy was shattered when they never materialized.

The series ends at the beginning of the 2006 troop surge.

Absent from Frontline’s analysis of the Iraq invasion is Gen. Petraeus who spearheaded the new surge plan that helped reinforce our “clear, hold, and build” strategy. Absent also is the cost of the war in American and international deaths and in economic strain.

The final words are a grim reminder of where we are today after five years of an American presence in Iraq and seven years in Afghanistan. Are the narrators words a bit too liberal? Should we be thinking with more optimism? Watch and read for yourself.

NARRATOR:

Violence is down in Iraq. They are cautiously calling clear, hold and build a success. But at a cost. The troops and reserves are stretched dangerously thin. The military worries how long the surge can be sustained. In his last State of the Union address, George W. Bush made a final plea to history …

PRESIDENT BUSH:

“The mission in Iraq has been difficult and trying for our nation. But it is in the vital interest of the United States that we succeed. We must do the difficult work today so that years form now, people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment, prevailed in a tough fight, and left behind a more hopeful region and a safer America.”

NARRATOR:

Soon Bush’s war will be handed to someone new.

Fifth Anniversary of Iraq Invasion Looms: We Want Your Stories!

Ms. Missive — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:48:49 +0000

March 20th, 2003 the journey began for many of us who gave our lives; literally and figuratively. This year, just before Easter, we’ll turn the clock on five years at war in Iraq.

I’d like to hear stories of where you were on the day we invaded Iraq.

Do you remember watching the green streaks of gun fire across the skies of Baghdad on CNN? Do you remember talking to someone about how it made you feel? If you’re in the military, do you remember feeling scared and pained by the looming dread in the pit of your stomach?

Give us details!

I’ll post my story on the 20th and I hope to have a few others to post too.

You can send me a message here or post a comment after this entry. No story is too small. If you wanna tell me you were reading a copy of Rolling Stone while waiting for your sick Grandma at the doctors office, great!

Happy Anniversary.

Iran and Iraq, sitting in a tree…

Skitz M. Jones — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:30:05 +0000

…you get the idea. Iranian Prez Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took a two day trip to the wartorn nation, and was welcomed by some, not so welcomed by others, and surprise surprise had some wonderfully kind words to say about U.S. involvement in the region. (no, not really)

Ahmadinejad’s visit follows trips to Iran last year by top officials of Iraq’s Shiite-led government, who have been fostering a closer relationship with predominantly Shiite Iran since the Saddam Hussein regime was toppled.

His visit was greeted warmly by Iraq’s Shiite Muslim leadership, who have had longtime links with Iran that predate the overthrow of Hussein. At the same time, many Sunni Muslims in Iraq dislike the Iranian regime and have demonstrated against his visit.

The Iranian president made digs at the United States. He contrasted his trip, which was advertised in advance, with the “stealth” visits of others, a reference to visits by U.S. officials, who don’t broadcast their visits to Iraq for security reasons.

Aside from this, Ahmadinejad made statements about the U.S. no longer being welcome in the region, and his opinion that we should leave matters of the Middle East to the peoples and governments who live in that region. He also had a bit to say about U.S. claims that Iran is backing and arming many insurgent groups that have been causing problems in Iraq.

“We do not care about their statements and remarks because they make statements based on erroneous information. We cannot count on what they say,” Ahmadinejad said. “We can offer them a friendly recommendation. We think that leveling allegations against others will not resolve the problem Americans are facing in the region.”

He said the foreign forces that came to Iraq from afar “shouldn’t interfere in the affairs of regional countries” and “should allow the region’s countries to run their own affairs.”

Now, don’t get me wrong here, I’m not normally one to side with madmen who live in states of great delusion… however, I do have to say, there might be some validity to parts of what has come out of his mouth regarding the visit, and the state of the region. Especially what follows:

Although Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980 after a territorial dispute, and the two countries fought an eight-year war, Ahmadinejad said the nations share a common history and he addressed what he called the common problems of terrorism.

“We think that terrorism is something as an issue detrimental to all parties,” he said, noting that Iran, Iraq and Turkey have all been hurt by terror.

“The peoples of this region, have seen nothing but devastation and destruction and sectarian attitudes , they have seen nothing but insult and humiliation.”

How very profound. Go figure. That from the “We do not have homosexuals in our country” guy. I guess even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.

Prince Harry in Afganistan: How the media keeps a secret.

Skitz M. Jones — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:27:16 +0000

Prince Harry, 3rd in line to the British throne, went to war for 12 weeks. And for 10 of them- no one knew!

But once the media blew the whistle when footage of the Prince doing the daily war type thing was seen, the decision was made to pull the potential high profile target from the frontlines and return him home.

Although the prince did not complete his tour, former palace spokesman Dickie Arbiter says it was still a successful deployment and the government’s agreement with major British media to blackout coverage of Harry did work for a while.

“It did survive for ten weeks, and Harry has got his wish. He has been out there, at the sharp end. Done a job that he has been trained to do and come home, and come home just a little bit earlier than he should have done,” he said.

Prince Harry, best known for his party lifestyle, now has another talking point on his profile. And it has to be given up to the Royals for letting one of their prized sons go to war to serve with his fellow troops.

On Saturday, his father Prince Charles and his older brother Prince William met Harry at Brize Norton air base near Oxford. Charles said he now knows what being a parent of a son or daughter on active duty can do to your nerves.

“While being incredibly proud of Harry, I am, I promise, you equally proud for what it is worth of all of the dedicated service given by all our armed forces,” he said.

Reacting to Prince Harry’s return, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the right decision was made to get him out of Afghanistan. He said security considerations for the prince were paramount.

“I think the whole country is going to be delighted that Prince Harry has come back safely, that his security has been protected,” he said. “Very grateful for him for the work that he has done in Afghanistan. Very grateful to all the soldiers as he is for all the support they gave him and also for what they are doing for their country.”

For ten weeks, the third in line to the throne worked as a forward air controller, a job that included calling in air strikes on Taliban targets.

There’s a couple of things we here in the States could learn from this whole ordeal.

How to keep our mouths shut about what our celebs are up to, because if something like this can be kept secret, then surely who got drunk at what party could be left out of the day’s newscast.
You have to admire the fact that the Royal family is willing to let an heir to the throne go to war. How many politicians in this day and age can say they’d let their children go off to “fight for their country”.

Just something else to mull over.

Turkey invades Iraq

Skitz M. Jones — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 07:06:19 +0000

Turkey has finally escalated it’s offensive against the Kurdish guerrillas hiding out in the mountainous regions of northern Iraq- which it had been shelling on and off in recent months.

This is the first occasion since the 2003 invasion led by U.S. forces that Turkish soldiers have moved onto Iraqi soil.

The offensive alarmed Iraqi officials, who have condemned violence by the separatist Kurdish guerrillas in the past but do not want to see a large-scale Turkish invasion.

“This has been a serious escalation,” Iraq’s foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said in an interview. “We hope that this will end as soon as possible for fear of escalation or any minor mistakes that would lead to a wider problem.”

After hours of bombing and shelling by Turkish artillery and warplanes, Turkish soldiers crossed via the Habur mountain pass after dusk Thursday into a sparsely populated corner of northern Iraq that the separatist rebel group, known as the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, has used as a refuge and a base for attacks inside Turkey. The number of Turkish troops in Iraq remained unclear Friday, but U.S. and Iraqi officials estimated it at 500 to 1,000. Turkish television reported that the number was as high as 10,000.

Ahmed Denize, a member of the PKK, said that small teams of guerrillas had fought the Turkish soldiers throughout the day Friday. Turkish soldiers destroyed three bridges during their movement into Iraq, he said. He also said PKK fighters had killed about 20 Turkish soldiers, but that claim could not be verified.

“We had information that they are coming, so we spread out in small groups and opened fire on them,” he said. “The fight is still going on.”

The violence between the Turkish government and the Kurdish rebels has roots going back decades, and the shelling against Kurdish rebel strongholds have been sanctioned by the U.S.- which has it’s obvious interests in Iraq, but how exactly does our country’s leadership feel about the new escalation?

The Bush administration has been an active partner in Turkey’s fight against the Kurdish rebels. Turkey has grown more aggressive since President Bush called the PKK a common enemy of Turkey, Iraq and the United States recently. The U.S. military has been sharing intelligence to help target rebel positions and is kept informed of Turkey’s military movements.

Gul called Bush early Thursday to tell him of the incursion, according to Turkey’s military. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged Turkey to keep the operation short and “keep in mind that while the terrorists need, obviously, to be stopped from doing what they’re doing, that there really can’t be a destabilization of the region.”

“This is something that we were aware of in advance, and, as you know, the U.S. agrees with Turkey that the PKK is a terrorist organization and is an enemy of Turkey, Iraq and the United States,” White House spokesman Scott Stanzel told reporters.

Kurdish officials said they have lived with the U.S.-sanctioned bombing campaign against the rebels but feel the incursion is a violation of their sovereignty; they have also said they will defend their territory, if necessary. Bakir, the Kurdish foreign relations official, said the Americans should halt the Turkish advance.

“We believe that they have a responsibility to stop this incursion, which is not in anybody’s interest,” he said.

After the cease-fire declared by Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr (which many see as just as responsible for the decline in violence in Iraq as the surge in U.S. troops) being announced to continue for another 6 months- this can only have negative effects on an already strained calm that rests over the nation of Iraq. Whether it will be allowed to continue remains to be seen, as the U.S. will be forced both to try to keep the peace in Iraq and appease the current administration there, and keep it’s allies in Turkey happy to maintain the movement routes which the U.S. uses to bring most of it’s supplies to troops stationed in Iraq.

UPDATE, 2/24/08 9:24 am CST: (by Ms. Missive)

As reported on an ABC news website, the Turkish death toll has now risen to 15 including a report that the Kurdish rebels downed a Turkish helicopter. I’d also like to note that the ABC news website is displaying the newest incarnation of the Iraqi flag as reported here on Patriot Missive.

The world is a tricky place…

Skitz M. Jones — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:03:54 +0000

America sits in 2008, a place craving change, empowered by messengers that claim change will come or enraged by suspected empty promises to speak out against those that use the word “change” an a mantra they feel hypnotizes and blinds the easily swayed. As the economy, the infrastructure, the media, the government, and even our own public fails us- and leaves us wanting more, we sit back hoping change for the better will come. But while we focus on our place in the world, and even tighter on our place in the country, our communities, and our jobs (or lack there of in too many cases), we must make sure we don’t become so narrow viewed as to neglect everything that happens in the rest of the world. With that in mind, here are some of the happenings from around the globe in brief (or not so brief) form.

We’ll start with a little U.S. citizen abroad news- Barack Obama has pulled out yet another wining nomination against Hillary Clinton in the Democrats abroad vote. This brings it now to 11 straight victories for Obama. Particularly of note for this vote is the fact that it was the first time online voting was permitted. “(S)aid Christine Schon Marques, the group’s international chair, in a phone interview from Geneva. “Many people overseas are very concerned about the war in Iraq; they’re looking for change.”” There’s that magic word again… Change. Also of note is the fact that Republicans do not hold global primaries. So I guess Republicans who work in Antarctica are S.O.L.

In nuclear news, forgetting the fact that we don’t want anyone (read: Iran) getting nuclear power, or the potential for nuclear weapons… oh wait… India is reaching the end of it’s deadline for a pact with the U.S. allowing the U.S. to send nuclear fuel and technology to India. Yes, that’s right, while we sit and stress over the fact that Iran wants to gain nuclear power for it’s country, here we seek to increase the potential for an already nuclear country to build more nuclear weapons. Regardless of whether the country is an ally or not- there are fears that this move could lead to a new nuclear arms race in the region- given that Pakistan and China are already nuclear as well, and the Communist parties in India fear that the move could give the U.S. too much influence in their country.

You know, mentioning nuclear armed Pakistan, a “friend” of ours who really always has our best interests at heart- it’s important to note what’s going on there given that many of the terrorists we’re fighting and searching for are training and hiding out in the mountains around their borders. The elections that took place in Pakistan have really shaken things up in that country, taking the bulk of power in parliament away from current President Pervez Musharraf’s party the PML-Q, and giving it to the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, the Independents, and the Pakistan People’s Party. The PPP (the party of recently assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, and the PML led by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif are now seeking a way to work together despite political differences, to reform a more democratic Pakistan, moving away from the military based rule of Musharraf- who is blamed for recent increases in violence, lack of democracy and rights, and increasing living costs with decreasing quality of living (sounding familiar?). Of course, to make matters more complicated- not only do the two new majority parties have different aims in their political agendas, they also will be unable to elect their current leaders should they seek to build a new governing body- due to the fact that they did not contest seats in the elections. The candidate from the PPP who did contest a seat- is dead. And we thought our election system was screwed.

To make matters the world over even more fun- there’s a whole new country that the governments of the world are split on whether to recognize or not, and even the people in this new country aren’t all in the boat that they want to be divided away from the country they used to be part of. Of course, I’m speaking of Kosovo recently declaring it’s independence from Serbia. So heated is the split between Serbian loyalists, and the Ethnic Albanian government and majority of the citizens, that violence is breaking out at an alarming rate. Most recently Serbs displeased with the recent independence have lashed out- destroying the U.S. embassy, as well as UN and NATO property.

Kosovo, which is 90 percent ethnic Albanian, has not been under Belgrade’s control since 1999, when NATO launched airstrikes to halt a Serbian crackdown on ethnic Albanian separatists. A U.N. mission has governed Kosovo since, with more than 16,000 NATO troops and KFOR, a multiethnic force, policing the province. But Serbia — and Kosovo’s Serbs, who make up less than 10 percent of Kosovo’s population — refuse to give up Kosovo, a territory considered the ancient cradle of Serbs’ state and religion.
Earlier Thursday, police estimated that about 150,000 people had attended a rally in the Serbian capital. The crowd waved Serbian flags and carried signs reading ‘‘Stop USA terror.’’ One group set fire to a red-and-black Albanian flag.

Another country’s people who fear that the U.S. is having too much influence in their homeland- to really drive home their point, not only did the destroy the embassy- but “(g)roups also broke into a McDonald’s restaurant and demolished the interior.” Ronald McDonald could not be reached for comment.

I know I’m probably preaching to the choir here- but too many folks I know talk about how much they don’t care about what happens in the rest of the world because it doesn’t affect them, but if it can’t be seen how all of these events influence what is, and what will be happening in our country in the future, and by influencing our country- having effects on our own lives, then maybe I’m just wrong and have lost the thread, and should go pick up an issue of People or US Weekly, watch a little American Gladiators, and go to bed.

Patriot Missive » World Wonders

Petraeus Party Crashes Lebanon

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

A Dose of Middle Eastern Irony

Other Posts You May Enjoy!

Pack Your Hijab! Iraq is Going to the Olympics!

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Saudi Fighter Airplane Crashes

Other Posts You May Enjoy!

Another cease-fire signed in Sadr City

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

The head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, may or may not be captured/dead for the 3rd time.

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

N. Korea helping Syria build nuclear reactor?

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

China Becomes More American Every Day

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Army Deployments Cut Back To 12 Months: Too Little Too Late?

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Petraeus recommends neither increase or decrease in troop levels.

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Sadr offers to disband Mahdi Army*

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Protesters attempt to stop the Olympic torch.

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Moktada al-Sadr calls for cease-fire in Basra

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Could a break down into greater sectarian violence be on the horizon for Iraq?

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

What to Expect When Watching Frontline: Bush’s War Part II

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Fifth Anniversary of Iraq Invasion Looms: We Want Your Stories!

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Iran and Iraq, sitting in a tree…

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Prince Harry in Afganistan: How the media keeps a secret.

Related Posts You May Enjoy!

Turkey invades Iraq

Other Posts You May Enjoy!

The world is a tricky place…

Related Posts You May Enjoy!