|
|
|
| Iraq + war on terrorism + Middle East conflict + critical perspectives |
 The president goes to Capitol Hill to lobby for tortureEditorial, Washington Post, September 15, 2006 President Bush rarely visits Congress. So it was a measure of his painfully skewed priorities that Mr. Bush made the unaccustomed trip yesterday to seek legislative permission for the CIA to make people disappear into secret prisons and have information extracted from them by means he dare not describe publicly. Of course, Mr. Bush didn't come out and say he's lobbying for torture. Instead he refers to "an alternative set of procedures" for interrogation. But the administration no longer conceals what it wants. It wants authorization for the CIA to hide detainees in overseas prisons where even the International Committee of the Red Cross won't have access. It wants permission to interrogate those detainees with abusive practices that in the past have included induced hypothermia and "waterboarding," or simulated drowning. And it wants the right to try such detainees, and perhaps sentence them to death, on the basis of evidence that the defendants cannot see and that may have been extracted during those abusive interrogation sessions. [complete article]  Comment -- The tone with which President Bush yesterday responded to questions on his lobbying efforts suggested that this is a man angry about not getting his way. The president of the United States of America sounds like a petulant brat. Even so, my sense is that the core issue here is one of legal necessity - not a necessity to create a legal framework that facilitates combating terrorism, but the necessity to provide legal cover for those (including Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld) who have already placed themselves in jeopardy by sanctioning the use of torture. Bush says he wants to protect the interrogators yet if any end up on trial, are shown to have broken the law and have clearly been following directives from the highest level of government, then in the course of time the legal repercussions may work themselves all the way back to Bush.If Bush now sounds like he feels cornered it may not simply be that his current efforts are frustrated but that he foresees the day when as a former president he might be held legally accountable. Rebelling against torture and BushBy Robert Kuttner, Boston Globe, September 16, 2006 My father was a machine gunner with the Army's 28th Infantry Division, which was among the first units to march down the Champs-Elysées after the Allied liberation of Paris . In December 1944, having landed at Normandy and fought across France and Belgium, he was captured in the Battle of the Bulge, and sent hundreds of miles through northern Germany in an unheated boxcar in the dead of winter to a prison camp at Muhlberg in the east. My father survived the war not because of the generosity of the Nazis to Jewish soldiers. The Germans must have been tempted to send captured Jewish American soldiers to Auschwitz along with Polish, German, and Dutch Jews and kindred human garbage. But they did not. My father survived because, amazingly, even the Nazis respected the reciprocal agreements on humane treatment of prisoners. The doctrine was simple: You don't abuse my soldiers when you take them prisoner, and I won't abuse yours. Mostly, despite the multiple atrocities of World War II, the doctrine held. [complete article] See also, The question of liability stirs concern at the CIA (NYT).  Better paid, better armed, better connected - Taliban rise againBy Declan Walsh, The Guardian, September 16, 2006 It was not meant to be like this. When American troops started to flounder in Iraq after 2003 President George Bush lauded Afghanistan as a major victory. When presidential and parliamentary elections passed peacefully, his generals wrote the insurgency off. "The Taliban is a force in decline," declared Major General Eric Olson 18 months ago. Today, to many observers those words look foolish. While northern and western Afghanistan remain stable, President Hamid Karzai is isolated and unpopular. Comparisons of the southern war with Vietnam are no longer considered outlandish. And dismayed western diplomats - the architects of reconstruction - are watching their plans go up in smoke. "Nobody saw this coming. It's pretty dire," admitted one official in Kabul. No single factor explains the slide. But some answers can be found in Ghazni, a central province considered secure until earlier this year. Now it is on the frontline of the Taliban advance, just a two-hour drive from Kabul. In the past two months the Taliban has swept across the southern half of the province with kidnappings, assassinations and gun battles. American officials believe Andar district, a few miles from their base in Ghazni town, is the Taliban hub for four surrounding provinces. This week they launched a drive in Andar, searching houses and raking buildings with helicopter gunship fire into a Taliban compound. At least 35 people died including a mother and two children. "We've warned people they may see soldiers shooting in their villages. I tell them this is the price of peace and freedom," said US commander Lieutenant Colonel Steven Gilbert. Travel along the Kabul-Kandahar highway that slices through Ghazni - once a symbol of western reconstruction - has become a high-stakes game of power. The Taliban sporadically mount checkpoints, frisking Afghans for ID cards, phone numbers or any other sign of a link to the government or foreign organisations. Those caught are beaten, kidnapped or killed. Foreigners travel south by plane, passing high over the road they once boasted about. [complete article] Pressures mount on Bush to bomb IranBy Patrick Seale, Daily Star, September 16, 2006 President George W Bush is coming under enormous pressure from Israel - and from Israel's neoconservative friends inside and outside the US administration - to harden still further his stance toward Iran. They want the American president to commit himself to bombing Iran if it does not give up its program of uranium enrichment - and to issue a clear ultimatum to Tehran that he is prepared to do so. They argue that mere rhetoric - such as Bush's recent diatribe, in which he compared Iran to al-Qaeda - is not enough, and might even be counter-productive, as it might encourage the Iranians to think that America's bark is worse than its bite. Hard-liners in Israel and the United States believe that only military action, or the credible threat of it, will now prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, with all that this would mean in terms of Israel's security and the balance of power in the strategically vital Middle East. Fears that Bush might succumb to this Israeli and neoconservative pressure is beginning to cause serious alarm in Moscow, Beijing, Berlin, Paris, Rome and other world capitals where, as if to urge caution on Washington, political leaders are increasingly speaking out in favor of dialogue with Tehran and against the use of military force. [complete article] In a replay of Iraq, a battle is brewing over intelligence on IranBy Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott, McClatchy, September 15, 2006 In an echo of the intelligence wars that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a high-stakes struggle is brewing within the Bush administration and in Congress over Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program and involvement in terrorism. U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism officials say Bush political appointees and hard-liners on Capitol Hill have tried recently to portray Iran's nuclear program as more advanced than it is and to exaggerate Tehran's role in Hezbollah's attack on Israel in mid-July. [complete article] Iran nukes: Why a compromise may be in the worksBy Tony Karon, Time.com, September 14, 2006 When it comes to anticipating Middle East crises, the oil futures market plays the canary in the coalmine. And the political risk factor that has done most to propel oil prices to record highs over the past six months has been the prospect of war between the United States and Iran. It's not hard to see why: Iran is the fourth-largest supplier in an already tight world market, and its threat to respond to any attack by closing the Straits of Hormuz -- the maritime bottleneck through which oil from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States must pass -- could send oil markets into shock. But oil futures fell to just under $64 a barrel this week, from close to $77 a month ago, suggesting that oil markets are not expecting a confrontation with Iran any time soon. [complete article] Avoiding the essential issues in PalestineBy Rami G. Khouri, Daily Star, September 16, 2006 Sometimes wishful thinking dominates rational hard work. This is probably what is going on with the expectation that a Palestinian national unity government will be formed any day now, comprising Hamas, Fatah and some technocrats and respected independents. This has already generated speculation about the possibility of breaking the diplomatic stalemate with Israel, and ending the American-European-Israeli boycott and economic sanctions against the present Hamas-led government. We should be clear about what this process is all about. It is emphatically not a self-generated Palestinian national step forward on the road to a coherent, consensus policy on domestic governance or relations with Israel. That is unfortunate, because the Palestinians need, and are capable of, defining their national priorities, agreeing on policies to achieve their goals, and mobilizing public opinion to either negotiate peace with Israel or resist it effectively. This is not what is happening. Rather, the national unity government being contemplated is a show of Palestinian weakness, vulnerability and irresoluteness. It is largely a desperate response to the Israeli-American-European financial embargo that is slowly starving the Palestinians. To avoid death by strangulation and malnutrition, the Palestinians must practice diplomatic submission and subservience to Israeli-American positions. In return for a resumption of aid and normal diplomatic contacts, the Palestinians must meet the three conditions that were set after the Hamas election victory in January. The Middle East "Quartet" established those conditions as: recognition of Israel's right to exist, renunciation of violence, and recognition of previous peace accords with the Israelis. These are reasonable and logical demands; but they are made unreasonable and illogical by being unilaterally imposed on the Palestinians in a context of siege and starvation warfare. The Palestinians are responding in a way that will not work. [complete article] Pope 'sorry' for offence to IslamBBC News, September 16, 2006 Pope Benedict XVI has said he is sorry that a speech in which he referred to Islam has offended Muslims. In a statement read out by a senior Vatican official, the Pope said he respected Islam and hoped Muslims would understand the true sense of his words. [complete article] Comment -- The Vatican is an extremely influential political institution and has no shortage of erudite and careful thinkers including the man at the top. At the same time, it clearly suffers from an insularity that probably stems from maintaining too great a distance from "the world." Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone's statement of apology on behalf of the pope, explains that in quoting Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, the pope was not endorsing the latter's opinion:He simply used it as a means to undertake - in an academic context, and as is evident from a complete and attentive reading of the text - certain reflections on the theme of the relationship between religion and violence in general, and to conclude with a clear and radical rejection of the religious motivation for violence, from whatever side it may come.That's fine, but is the pope, or are his advisors, so naive as to imagine that press coverage of his speeches will be based on a complete and attentive reading of the pope's text? No one gets a free pass just because the media doesn't function the way they might wish it would. This pope -- or any pope -- should know better. Muslim anger grows at Pope speechBBC News, September 15, 2006 A statement from the Vatican has failed to quell criticism of Pope Benedict XVI from Muslim leaders, after he made a speech about the concept of holy war. Speaking in Germany, the Pope quoted a 14th Century Christian emperor who said the Prophet Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhuman" things. [complete article] Comment -- Pope Benedict XVI might feel like a victim of the shortcomings of the media right now, but a 21st century pope should know full well that his words, phrases, and sentences will likely receive wider attention than any erudite thesis he might be trying to make.The context in which the pope quoted Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, was a speech at his old university in which he was challenging secularist reason. His appeal was for a marriage of faith and reason; his stated purpose to provide a foundation for a "dialogue of cultures." It sounds like a noble endeavor, yet rather than cite a conflict between faith and violence and pointing a critical finger at Islam, he should have been addressing those of his fellow Christians whose addiction to faith undermines their ability to reason. Right now, there is just as much violence in the world being committed by people who call themselves Christians as by anyone else. It's hardly surprising that armies manned by Christians fighting in the Middle East are perceived by many Muslims as being engaged in a war on Islam. The violent acts of a handful of jihadists in the West have resulted in only a fraction of the amount of suffering that Muslims have experienced in recent years. As an Iraqi wrote this week, "With 3,000 civilians killed every four weeks, my country suffers its own 9/11 on a monthly basis." Another passage in the text that the pope quoted says, "Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death..." Those are words that George Bush should reflect upon. As for the pope, if he really wants to open up a dialogue of cultures, he should work on opening up the culture he represents rather than antagonizing those with whom he hopes to promote an exchange. A dialogue of cultures requires our willingness to talk, to listen, to reflect, to reason, to engage in self-criticism and self-analysis, but above all that we have a respectful interest in cultures that we sincerely hope to better understand. When it comes to dialogue between members of different faiths, it should be a conversation between people. Religion should not hide behind sacred text; it manifests itself in the intersection between faith and action. Christianity is what Christians do. The same applies to Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus or whoever else. In recognizing that each faith is nothing more than the expression it finds through people's lives, there should be enough humility to go around and hold in check the tendency everyone seems to have of elevating their own faith above all others. EU agrees to back Palestinian unity governmentBy David Brunnstrom and Mark John, Reuters, September 15, 2006 European Union foreign ministers agreed on Friday to back a Palestinian national unity government being formed by President Mahmoud Abbas with the Hamas Islamist movement, despite U.S. misgivings. "We agreed that we have to support the new Palestinian government. It's a very important turning point for the situation," Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema told Reuters. "(EU foreign policy chief) Javier Solana told us in the platform there will be recognition by the new government of the treaty signed by the Palestinian Authority in the past -- it means recognize Israel as a partner," D'Alema said. [complete article] U.S. moves to scuttle Arab plan for international peace conferenceBy Nathan Guttman, Jerusalem Post, September 14, 2006 The US is trying to block attempts by Arab countries to turn the UN Security Council into a key player in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the upcoming General Assembly opening next week. In discussions among Israeli and US officials over the past few days, it was agreed that the US will use its diplomatic power to sideline the Arab League initiative, which intends to use the Security Council as the main vehicle for convening an international peace conference to deal with the conflict. Instead, US diplomats are working to convince the Arab members of the UN to agree to a presidential statement instead of a UN resolution. The wording of such a statement is now in the works and it will be finalized in a meeting of the Quartet next Wednesday, a day before the Security Council takes on the issue. [complete article] Bush's message to IranBy David Ignatius, Washington Post, September 15, 2006 Our discussion followed the 12-day visit to the United States by former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami. I asked Bush why he had approved this visit by a high-level Iranian and what he thought it had accomplished. "One of the dilemmas facing [American] policymakers is to understand the nature, the complex nature of the Iranian regime," he said. "And I thought it would be beneficial for our country to receive the former leader, Khatami, to hear what he had to say. And as importantly for him, to hear what Americans had to say." He wanted Khatami to understand that on the nuclear issue and Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, "It's not just George W. Bush speaking." The Khatami visit "said that the United States is willing to listen to voices," Bush explained. "And I hope that sends a message to the Iranian people that we're an open society, and that we respect the people of Iran." Clearly, the White House wants to reach out to segments of Iranian opinion beyond the hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I asked Bush what next steps he would favor in opening dialogue with Iran. "I would like to see more cultural exchanges," he said. "I would like to see university exchanges. I would like to see more people-to-people exchanges." "I know that the more we can show the Iranian people the true intention of the American government," Bush concluded, "the more likely it is that we will be able to reach a diplomatic solution to a difficult problem." I came away with a sense that Bush is serious about finding a peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis, and that he is looking hard for ways to make connections between America and Iran. [complete article] Comment -- David Ignatius exudes common decency, but that's not why he got invited to the White House - they knew he'd give the president an easy ride. Bush said that allowing Khatami to visit demonstrated that "United States is willing to listen to voices." OK. So, what's the follow up question? "Mr. President. Which members of your administration met with Khatami?" Ignatius failed to ask, but presumably the answer would have been, "no one." Is that how the United States listens?
An unexpected collision over detaineesBy Carl Hulse, New York Times, September 15, 2006 President Bush and Congressional Republicans spent the last 10 days laying the foundation for a titanic pre-election struggle over national security, and now they have one. But the fight playing out this week on Capitol Hill is not what they had in mind. Instead of drawing contrasts with Democrats, the president's call for creating military tribunals to try terror suspects -- a key substantive and political component of his fall agenda -- has erupted into a remarkably intense clash pitting some of the best-known warriors in the Republican Party against Mr. Bush and the Congressional leadership. At issue are definitions of what is permissible in trials and interrogations that both sides view as central to the character of the nation, the way the United States is perceived abroad and the rules of the game for what Mr. Bush has said will be a multigenerational battle against Islamic terrorists. [complete article] See also, Bush stance on al-Qaida suspects is morally wrong, says Colin Powell (The Guardian). In search of the Taliban's missing linkBy Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times, September 16, 2006 Despite spending many millions of dollars, US intelligence, five years after the ouster of the Taliban from Kabul, remains in the dark over the command structure of the Taliban. The Taliban have a tight high command from where - and this is the mystery - precise orders, such as targets, are relayed to the fighters in the field. Cracking this code is key to putting a brake on the insurgency that gathers strength by the day. When the Taliban's spring offensive began in June, the US-led coalition's intelligence identified the people in the Taliban's command council and their usual modus operandi and location in the guerrilla war. [complete article] Queuing up to dieBy Ashfaq Yusufzai, Asia Times, September 16, 2006 One morning in late August, a group of about 15 men from the Hizbul Mujahideen jihadist group walked into Lal Faqir's home to congratulate him for the "martyrdom" of his son Bahar Ali, who, they said, had died after ramming an explosives-laden car into a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) vehicle in Afghanistan. "I am not repentant over what my son has done. It's the easiest way to get the blessings of God Almighty and enter paradise," Lal Faqir told Inter Press Service, trying desperately to hide the grief at having lost his 23-year-old son. Ali, said his father, was a calm person but religious to the core. He first left his family two years ago to take part in the jihad in Kashmir, a Muslim-majority territory long disputed between India and Pakistan. [complete article] Months after seizing power, Mogadishu's Islamist rulers slowly reveal agendaBy Shashank Bengali, McClatchy, September 14, 2006 More than three months after a federation of Islamic clerics came to power in Somalia, the group, as expected, has established strict religious rule in the capital, Mogadishu, and the wide swath of the country it controls. But Somalis, diplomats and regional analysts say the group also has shown a willingness to negotiate, and that that has eased fears that its rule would turn the anarchic country into another training ground and safe haven for Islamic terrorists. "There was a feeling in the international community that the Taliban was taking over and there would be a big fight over Somalia in the region," said Mario Raffaeli, Italy's special envoy to Somalia. "But three months later there is no war; there is dialogue. So I have to be more optimistic." [complete article] Afghanistan: a lost cause?By Graham Usher, Al-Ahram Weekly, September 14, 2006 Brigadier Ed Butler was blunt. "The violence in Afghanistan is now worse than in Iraq," he told a meeting of NATO's defence chiefs last week. He was referring to the ferocious battles that have assailed NATO troops since they took over most combat operations in Afghanistan from US-led forces in August. Butler is head of NATO's 4,500 strong British contingent. He says "hundreds" of Taliban guerrillas have been killed in the fighting. But so have dozens of NATO soldiers and scores of civilians, including 14 in a suicide attack in Kabul on 8 September. Canadian Defence Minister, Gordon O Connor, was more sober in his assessments gleaned from a tour of NATO Canadian troops in Afghanistan's restive southern provinces. "We cannot eliminate the Taliban," he said simply. This will come as news to his people, as well as to those of the 25 other NATO nations. For regime change in Afghanistan has been sold as one of the few unalloyed successes of the new world born of the 9/11 attacks on America. [complete article] Expert advice on AfghanistanBy Haroon Siddiqui, Toronto Star, September 14, 2006 Brahimi, 72, the world-renowned United Nations envoy, is a former foreign minister of Algeria, who in 1990 helped the Arab League end the Christian-Muslim civil war in Lebanon. Post-Taliban, he organized the Bonn conference (November 2001), then the loya jirga, the traditional gathering of tribes (June 2002), and stayed on until December 2004 trying to turn the failed state into a functioning one. Since then, he has been a UN envoy to Iraq (2004) and Darfur (2006). I reached him in his Paris apartment. "We have expected miracles in Afghanistan but miracles don't happen very often on Earth. A country that has systematically been destroyed for 25 years is not going to become paradise in 25 or 35 months. "The Taliban had never been defeated. They had been pushed out of Kabul. They scattered all over and were demoralized but now some of them have regrouped and are reminding the world that they exist." The Taliban are back because of the mistakes made by the United States and the allies. "One of my own biggest mistakes was not to speak to the Taliban in 2002 and 2003. "It was not possible to get them in the tent at the Bonn conference because of 9/11 and they themselves were not eager. But immediately after that, we should've spoken to those who were willing to speak to us. "That I consider to be my mistake -- a very, very big mistake." [complete article] U.S., Israel cool to proposal for Palestinian unity governmentBy Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, September 14, 2006 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni reacted skeptically yesterday to a proposed unity Palestinian government that would include Hamas, saying the militant group must first renounce terrorism and accept Israel's right to exist before restrictions on international aid can be lifted. [...] "The outcome of the process is not clear," Rice said. "It goes without saying that it's hard to have a partner for peace if you don't accept the right of the other partner to exist. It goes without saying that it's hard to have a process for peace if you do not renounce violence." [complete article] Comment -- If Hamas was to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and was to unilaterally renounce violence, where's the evidence that Israel or the U.S. would reciprocate in any meaningful way? Hamas has every reason to believe that not only is its own right to exist not acknowledged, but that its Israeli and American opponents have actively pursued and continue to pursue the organization's destruction. That's not exactly a way of promoting the possibility for any future "partnership." Perhaps as a small trust-building exercise, the Israeli government could agree that after Gilad Shalit is released, it will end its policy of assassinating Hamas' leaders. New Palestinian government hangs on detainees: AbbasBy Indalecio Alvarez, AFP, September 14, 2006 Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas said the formation of a new government of national unity was linked to the fate of Hamas officials held by Israel and the Israeli soldier captured by militants in the Gaza Strip. "Before this government is announced, several things need to be resolved: the problem of the Israeli soldier and that of the detained Palestinian prisoners, MPs and ministers," Abbas told journalists after meeting visiting French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy. He added that the announcement of a new government also depended on a complete lack of violence in the Palestinian territories. [complete article] West Bank: a government in jailBy Ilene R. Prusher, Christian Science Monitor, September 14, 2006 Mohammed Barghouthi was coming home from a late-night meeting when he found himself at a makeshift Israeli army checkpoint. The soldiers were stopping Palestinians, checking their IDs, and telling them to strip. "I said no. I am a Palestinian government minister and I will not be treated like this," recalls Barghouthi, the Palestinian Authority's minister of labor. So began his arrest and detention on June 28, three days after Cpl. Gilad Shalit of the Israeli Defense Forces was kidnapped by militants. With dozens of Palestinian officials held in Israeli jails and five cabinet ministers behind bars, the government is operating in absentia. Barely able to function, its problems are further exacerbated by severe travel restrictions and a financial crunch. Barghouthi was one of scores of Palestinian officials arrested by Israel after Shalit's abduction, including 33 elected members of the Palestinian legislative council and five cabinet ministers. Most have been held without charges, as Israeli law permits when someone presents a security threat. Some, according to a request by the Monitor for information on their cases from the IDF, are accused of "membership in an illegal organization" - Hamas. Barghouthi, an independent who is not a member of Hamas but was appointed to the Ministry of Labor because of his professional management credentials, was released more than six weeks later on Aug. 14. By then, he was so thin and disheveled, his family recalls, that when he came home his children cried and his mother collapsed. [complete article] Cut off, Gazan economy nears collapseBy Steven Erlanger, New York Times, September 14, 2006 For the last week, Zidan Abu Reziq has been sleeping outside, next to his plantings on a small square of sand he expropriated. The Abu Reziqs, like many of the large, destitute refugee families in this shrapneled, tumbledown slum, need to plant to eat. They took the land and planted it with vegetables, an investment of about $50, most of the money that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency gave them to buy school uniforms for the children. Zidan’s wife, Tamam, admits her 51-year-old husband sleeps with his plants because he needs to protect their investment in the lawless chaos of Gaza, where his own small theft of land, 20 square yards that belongs to the government, is dwarfed by the huge expropriations by gangs and families and militia groups that have taken over much of the best land left behind when the Israelis pulled out their settlers a year ago. It is difficult to exaggerate the economic collapse of Gaza, with the Palestinian Authority cut off from funds by Israel, the United States and the European Union after Hamas won the legislative elections on Jan. 25. [complete article] Death toll soars in BaghdadBy Patrick J. McDonnell and Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times, September 14, 2006 On a day in which nearly 100 bodies attested to Iraq's unbridled violence, Democrats stepped up their response to President Bush's policies, with former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski calling the war "unwinnable." Iraqi officials announced they had found the bodies of 60 men, some of whom had been shot in the head after being tortured, over the previous 24 hours. They said there was no single massacre or mass execution. Rather, the slaughter in two Baghdad neighborhoods was probably the result of multiple roving assassination teams, they said. In addition to the apparent executions, a pair of car bombs and other violence took at least 35 lives and left scores injured Wednesday, officials said. U.S. authorities reported the deaths of two more American soldiers, one killed by a roadside bomb south of Baghdad and the other killed in action in Al Anbar province, the hotbed of the Sunni Arab insurgency in western Iraq. [complete article] U.S. troop levels in Iraq reach 147,000By Gordon Lubold, Army Times, September 13, 2006 Troop levels in Iraq have topped 147,000, a big jump over the number of troops deployed there over the last several months, but Pentagon officials say it's only a temporary spike as commands change over. The number of U.S. troops in Iraq as of Sept. 13 marks a 16 percent increase over the number of troops reported by the Pentagon in late July, when it was around 127,000. Although troop levels fluctuate routinely as troops move in and out of the Iraqi theater, the 20,000-troop increase from two months ago is a far more sizeable jump than usual. Part of the increase can be attributed to the decision to extend 3,500 members of the 172nd Stryker Brigade, based in Alaska, for another four months to help stem the violence in Baghdad. The remaining increase is a result of other American units transferring command to follow-on forces. [complete article] Why we can't send more troopsBy Lawrence J. Korb and Peter Ogden, Washington Post, September 14, 2006 In "Reinforce Baghdad" [op-ed, Sept. 12], William Kristol and Rich Lowry argue that the United States needs to deploy "substantially" more troops to Iraq to stabilize the country. Aside from the strategic dubiousness of their proposal -- Kristol and Lowry's piece might alternatively have been titled "Reinforcing Failure" -- there is a practical obstacle to it that they overlook: Sending more troops to Iraq would, at the moment, threaten to break our nation's all-volunteer Army and undermine our national security. This is not a risk our country can afford to take. In their search for additional troops and equipment for Iraq, the first place that Kristol and Lowry would have to look is the active Army. But even at existing deployment levels, the signs of strain on the active Army are evident. In July an official report revealed that two-thirds of the active U.S. Army was classified as "not ready for combat." When one combines this news with the fact that roughly one-third of the active Army is deployed (and thus presumably ready for combat), the math is simple but the answer alarming: The active Army has close to zero combat-ready brigades in reserve. The second place to seek new troops and equipment is the Army National Guard and Reserve. But the news here is, if anything, worse. When asked by reporters to comment on the strain that the active Army was under, the head of the National Guard said that his military branch was "in an even more dire situation than the active Army. We both have the same symptoms; I just have a higher fever." [complete article] The al-Qaida mythBy Martin Sieff, UPI, September 13, 2006 Al-Qaida has been decapitated in Iraq, yet the war there is raging worse than ever. Why? U.S. military authorities have now revealed that Hamed Jumaa Faris Juri al-Saedi, al-Qaida's number two man in Iraq, was captured in June. He was caught not long after U.S. and allied Iraqi security forces finally hunted down and killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaida's veteran director of operations in Iraq and the dark mastermind behind its merciless and unrelenting terror campaign against Iraqi civilians, including women and children, as well as against U.S. and other forces. The killing of Zarqawi made headline news around the world right after it happened. U.S. security authorities sat on the details of the killing of Saedi for two-and-a-half months after it happened. Meanwhile, as we have regularly noted in our companion "Iraq Benchmarks" column, the level of attrition inflicted upon U.S. forces in Iraq by Sunni insurgents has remained relatively high, and while it has not metastasized to new levels, the insurgents have been able to keep up the rate of casualties they have been inflicting on U.S. forces. [complete article] Terrorist network disconnectBy Gareth Porter, TomPaine.com, September 13, 2006 George Bush's new argument that Iran and Hezbollah are part of the same terrorist network as al-Qaida turns the recent history of international politics on its head to cover up a truth that makes the Bush administration extremely uncomfortable. In two speeches on August 31 and September 5, Bush said there is no difference between Iran and Hezbollah, on one hand, and al-Qaida, on the other, as terrorist enemies of the United States. This is fraud so brazen that it makes even the outrageous 2002 Bush administration effort to portray Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden as allies pale by comparison. [complete article] Blair hit by Lebanon backlash as minister admits ceasefire 'mistake'By Andy McSmith, The Indepedent, September 14, 2006 A Foreign Office minister has conceded that Tony Blair's refusal to call for a ceasefire during 34 days of slaughter in Lebanon may have been a mistake. The admission by Kim Howells, minister for the Middle East, reflects the growing worries of senior figures in government that Mr Blair's defence of US foreign policy at every turn is damaging his administration at home and abroad. Mr Howells also conceded that the decision to oppose - with the US - the international demand for an immediate ceasefire was not properly explained to the British public. Mr Blair's isolated stance is seen as a major reason for the revolt that forced him to announce last week that he would be standing down within 12 months. [complete article] Hizbollah leader attacks Lebanon PMFinancial Times, September 13, 2006 Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbollah, used Tony Blair's recent visit to Beirut to launch a stinging attack against Fouad Siniora, Lebanon’s prime minister, and the pro-western parliamentary majority that backs him. In unusually blunt remarks that will raise already strained political tensions in the nation as it seeks to rebuild after the 34-day conflict between the Shia movement and Israel, Mr Nasrallah said the "government neither stopped the war, nor protected Lebanon." [complete article] One month on, uneasy truce holds in battle-scarred border villagesBy Clancy Chassay, The Guardian, September 14, 2006 In the dusty, broken village of Aita al-Shaab, where almost every house bears scars from the battle between Israel and Hizbullah, the war still lingers a month after it officially ended. Israeli tanks and bulldozers roam back and forth across the border at night, locals say, while Hizbullah fighters patrol the thick green hills above the village. The sound of Israeli drones is familiar to the people of southern Lebanon, who report daily over-flights. According to Alexander Ivanko, spokesman for the UN interim force in Lebanon (Unifil), there have been more than 100 recorded ceasefire violations by Israeli forces in the last month. These have been mostly over-flights and incursions by tanks, troops and bulldozers. Mr Ivanko said that 24 Lebanese civilians - including four men from Aita al-Shaab - had been detained at gunpoint by Israeli troops. All were later released. [complete article] Amnesty: Hezbollah committed war crimesBy Katie Fretland, AP, September 14, 2006 Hezbollah militants broke international law by firing thousands of rockets into Israel and killing dozens of civilians during the recent conflict with Israel, Amnesty International charged Thursday. The human rights group called for a United Nations inquiry into what it called war crimes by Israel and Hezbollah, but its report focused on the actions of the Lebanese militants during the 34-day conflict. Hezbollah launched nearly 4,000 rockets into northern Israel in July and August, killing at least 39 civilians. [complete article] Comment -- Amnesty's recent report, Deliberate destruction or "collateral damage"? Israeli attacks on civilian infrastructure provoked a predictable tirade from Alan Dershowitz to which AI gave this response. Somehow I doubt that AI's latest report will lead Dershowitz to recant his charge that AI has a "nefarious anti-Israel agenda" and acknowledge that they are fair and balanced.Meanwhile, although Hezbollah asserts that all its rocket attacks were launched as reprisals to Israeli attacks, Israel's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mark Regev says that, "It is also important to remember that the leaders of Hezbollah have spoken on many occasions about their desire to destroy the state of Israel." On the other hand, Israel's prime minister, Ehud Olmert claims that a measure of Israel's success in the war is that "half of Lebanon is destroyed." So let's see if I've got this straight: Israel can through its actions (but not words) threaten the existence of a state and that's OK, but Hezbollah can through its words (but not actions) threaten the existence of a state and world civilization is in jeopardy? I see. U.N. inspectors dispute Iran report by House panelBy Dafna Linzer, Washington Post, September 14, 2006 U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest" and offering evidence to refute its central claims. Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements." The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna. The IAEA openly clashed with the Bush administration on pre-war assessments of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents. [complete article] U.S. seeks Iran sanctions nowBy Mark Heinrich, Reuters, September 13, 2006 The United States said on Wednesday Iran was "aggressively" pursuing atom bombs and should face sanctions now, but EU allies stressed it was not too late for talks on a negotiated solution to its disputed nuclear work. The Western partners in a group of six powers dealing with Iran appeared to differ over the urgency of sanctions in their statements to the U.N. nuclear watchdog's board of governors. And a minister from Washington's staunchest ally, Britain, warned Tehran probably had the resources to endure sanctions. [complete article] Iranian president willing to negotiateReuters, September 14, 2006 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said early today that he thought his dispute with the West over his country's nuclear program could be resolved through negotiations, and that he was open to "new conditions." "We are partial to dialogue and negotiation, and we believe that we can resolve the problems in a context of dialogue and of justice together," Ahmadinejad said at a midnight news conference during a brief visit to Senegal's capital. He was asked about a U.S. statement Wednesday that Iran was "aggressively" pursuing nuclear weapons through its controversial uranium enrichment program, and that the country should face economic sanctions because of it. "I don't believe there will be sanctions because there is no reason to have sanctions. It would be preferable for the U.S. officials not to speak in anger," he said, flashing a smile. [complete article] Poland to send more troops to AfghanistanBy Bonnie Malkin, The Guardian, September 14, 2006 Poland is to send another 900 troops to bolster the Nato peacekeeping force in Afghanistan, the Polish defence minister announced today. The US and UK yesterday urged Nato nations to send more troops to Afghanistan to help fight the Taliban insurgency after a Nato commander called for reinforcements last week. Poland already has a 100-strong contingent in the country. "As of February next year, over 1,000 Polish soldiers are going to be serving in Afghanistan," the defence minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, told Polish television. [complete article] Syria, US shrouded in the fog of warBy Sami Moubayed, Asia Times, September 15, 2006 Starting with what is fact, four attackers and one security guard died in the unsuccessful attack on the US Embassy in the Rawda neighborhood of the Syrian capital Damascus on Tuesday morning. And, contrary to some reports, all of the attackers were Syrian, and not jihadis from neighboring countries. After this, it all gets a bit murky. Minutes after the attack, Syrian opposition leader Ali Sadr al-Din al-Baynouni of the banned Muslim Brotherhood spoke from his London exile to Doha-based Al-Jazeera TV, saying the attack was fabricated by Syrian intelligence. The reasons, he said, were to score points with the Americans and prove to Washington that Syria and the US had the same enemy in radical political Islam. Then a senior Syrian government official accused the United States of being behind the assault on its own embassy. One unidentified Ba'ath Party official was quoted in the media as saying, "Only the Americans can succeed in carrying out an attack just 200 meters from President [Bashar al-]Assad's residence in the most heavily guarded section of Syria." [complete article] Al-Qaeda 'issues France threat'BBC News, September 14, 2006 Al-Qaeda's deputy leader has claimed that a radical Algerian Islamist group had joined al-Qaeda and is being urged to punish France, it has emerged. Ayman al-Zawahiri appeared in a video on a website on the fifth anniversary of the 11 September attacks. In the tape, he issued a warning of new attacks targeting Israel and the Gulf. [complete article] The folly of exporting democracyBy Anatol Lieven and John Hulsman, TomPaine.com, September 12, 2006 A certain awareness of the limits on American power is growing among the wiser U.S. policy elites as a result of the disasters into which the Bush administration has led the United States. Even in these circles, however, a very widespread belief exists that in the former Soviet Union and in the Muslim world, America can compensate for these weaknesses by encouraging the spread of democracy. The idea that "democracy" will solve all problems is also used as a conscious or unconscious excuse to avoid having to think seriously about negotiating compromise solutions to a range of disputes in the Middle East, and especially, of course, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- since this would require a willingness to show moral courage in facing the inevitable backlash within the U.S. [complete article] Guantanamo an 'affront to democracy'By Alyssa Braithwaite, The Australian, September 13, 2006 A key British judicial figure and senior Cabinet minister has denounced Guantanamo Bay as a "shocking affront to democracy" and says nations must not sacrifice values in the fight against terrorism. Britain's Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, delivering a lecture today at the NSW Supreme Court, questioned the constitutional basis of the US's treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. He said the response to terrorism must be conducted in accordance with fundamental principles of human rights. [complete article] See also, The battle for Guantanamo (NYT). Taliban adopting Iraq-style jihadBy Scott Peterson, Christian Science Monitor, September 13, 2006 Even in near-total darkness, the wounded Taliban fighter insists on masking his identity, his head and face covered by a tightly wound white cloth. Only two bright eyes and a confident voice tell how Afghanistan's Islamist militants are ramping up their fight against US and NATO forces. He speaks a warning, of how the "new" Taliban has become more radical, more sophisticated, and more brutal than the Taliban ousted by US-led forces in 2001 - and of how its jihadist agenda now mirrors that of Al Qaeda, stretching far beyond Afghanistan. Among the keys to the Taliban resurgence - which is sparking lethal violence on a scale unknown here for almost five years - are crucial lessons drawn from Iraq. "That's part of our strategy - we are trying to bring [the Iraqi model] to Afghanistan," says the fighter. "Things will get worse here." [complete article] See also, Osama's on the move again (Asia Times). Soldiers reveal horror of Afghan campaignBy Kim Sengupta, The Independent, September 13, 2006 Soldiers deployed in Helmand province five years on from the US-led invasion, and six months after the deployment of a large British force, have told The Independent that the sheer ferocity of the fighting in the Sangin valley, and privations faced by the troops, are far worse than generally known. "We are flattening places we have already flattened, but the attacks have kept coming. We have killed them by the dozens, but more keep coming, either locally or from across the border," one said. "We have used B1 bombers, Harriers, F16s and Mirage 2000s. We have dropped 500lb, 1,000lb and even 2,000lb bombs. At one point our Apaches [helicopter gunships] ran out of missiles they have fired so many. Almost any movement on the ground gets ambushed. We need an entire battle group to move things. Yet they will not give us the helicopters we have been asking for. [complete article] Taliban exposes cracks in NatoBy Simon Tisdall, The Guardian, September 13, 2006 Nato chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer's public plea yesterday for up to 2,500 additional soldiers to fight alongside British, Canadian and Dutch forces in southern Afghanistan has highlighted deep internal strains in the alliance caused by unexpectedly fierce Taliban resistance in Helmand and Kandahar provinces. The Nato secretary-general's appeal followed an unsuccessful attempt to drum up more support from leading members such as France, Germany, Italy and Spain in Warsaw at the weekend. A formal force generation conference will be held today. "We are working on getting nations to do what they promised," Mr De Hoop Scheffer said. "I am calling for alliance solidarity because some nations are carrying more of the burden than others." [complete article] See also, Blair tells Nato: send more troops to Afghanistan (The Guardian). In Iran, Iraqi Is offered aid in trying to quell violenceBy Nazila Fathi and Edward Wong, New York Times, September 13, 2006 In his first state visit to Iran, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki discussed the security situation in Iraq with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and asked for his support in quelling the violence that threatens to fracture Iraq. "We had a good discussion with Mr. Ahmadinejad," Mr. Maliki said at a news conference here on Tuesday, after the two met. "Even in security issues, there is no barrier in the way of cooperation." For his part, Mr. Ahmadinejad said, "Iran will give its assistance to establish complete security in Iraq, because Iraq's security is Iran's security." It was not clear what form Iranian support on security would take, or how it would be received by the American authorities here. [complete article] 65 bodies found in latest Iraq bloodshedBy Sameer N. Yacoub, AP, September 13, 2006 Police found the bodies of 65 men who had been tortured, shot and dumped, most around Baghdad, while car bombs, mortar attacks and shootings killed at least 30 people around Iraq and injured dozens more. Two U.S. soldiers were killed, one by an attack in restive Anbar province Monday, and the other Tuesday by a roadside bomb south of Baghdad, the U.S. military command said. Police said 60 of the bodies were found overnight around Baghdad, with the majority dumped in predominantly Sunni Arab neighborhoods, police said. Another five were found floating down the Tigris river in Suwayrah, 25 miles south of the capital. The bodies were bound, bore signs of torture and had been shot, said police 1st Lt. Thayer. Such killings are usually the work of death squads -- both Sunni Arab and Shiite -- who kidnap people and often torture them with power drills or beat them badly before shooting them. [complete article] Mideast sees Iraq 'disaster,' Annan saysBy Nick Wadhams, AP, September 13, 2006 U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Wednesday that most leaders in the Middle East believe the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and its aftermath "a real disaster" for the region. Annan said many leaders believed the United States should stay until Iraq improves, while others, such as Iran, said the United States should leave immediately. That means that the United States has found itself in the difficult position where "it cannot stay and it cannot leave." "Most of the leaders I spoke to felt the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath has been a real disaster for them," Annan said. "They believe it has destabilized the region." [complete article] Hamas Cabinet resigns, seen as key stepBy Sarah El Deeb, AP, September 13, 2006 The Palestinian Cabinet resigned Wednesday to clear the way for a new unity government, and President Mahmoud Abbas said he plans to send a delegation to the U.N. to try to revive a Mideast peace plan. The mass resignation is the first step in forming a government that would include both the Islamic militant group Hamas and Abbas' moderate Fatah faction. Government spokesman Ghazi Hamad said the ministers handed their portfolios to Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, a Hamas leader. The next step would be Haniyeh's resignation. Abbas would then pick a candidate to form a new government -- probably Haniyeh. [complete article] U.S. wary of Palestinian planBy Paul Richter and Ken Ellingwood, Los Angeles Times, September 13, 2006 Palestinian plans to form a coalition government have created a quandary for the Bush administration, which wants to ease suffering in the Gaza Strip and West Bank without lifting pressure on Hamas. Leaders of the radical Islamic group, and those of the rival Fatah faction, announced this week that they were close to completing a deal that they hoped would persuade the West to end an aid cutoff that had bankrupted the government and set off factional fighting. U.S. officials, who consider Hamas a terrorist group, have halted all but direct humanitarian aid since Hamas came to power in January elections. U.S. officials have said they want to avert a humanitarian catastrophe in the territories, but noted Tuesday that the Palestinian proposal might not be enough to end the aid ban. The U.S. bind was complicated by Europe's warm reaction to the Palestinian unity government plan, posing a risk that a new transatlantic rift could develop over the issue. British Prime Minister Tony Blair said this week after a visit to the region that it might be possible for the West to deal with a unified government. [complete article] Hamas declares EU to lift PA siegeBy Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, September 13, 2006 European states have signaled to the Hamas government that they intend to lift the economic embargo on the Palestinian Authority once a national unity government is established, according to Ahmed Yusef, political adviser to Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. "The European states have promised to reconsider their stance regarding the boycott of the Palestinian government. Following the war in Lebanon there is greater understanding in Europe that they must present a more balanced stance regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict," Yusef said in an interview with Haaretz yesterday. [complete article] More Palestinians urging an end to paralyzed governing authorityBy Scott Wilson, Washington Post, September 13, 2006 As the young editor of Hamas's weekly newspaper, Sari Orabi is a careful monitor of what he describes as the "surprisingly frank" debate underway within the party that took control of the Palestinian Authority just over five months ago. Orabi, sporting blue jeans and bristling hair, said he was among those who argued that the radical Islamic movement should not compete in last January's parliamentary elections, fearing victory would bring sanctions from Israel and international donors that classify Hamas as a terrorist organization. That prediction has proved true, bankrupting the authority and raising questions within party ranks over whether the government Hamas won the right to run is worth maintaining at all. "The situation we face is proof that the Palestinian Authority under the occupation is an illusion," Orabi, 26, said recently over tea in an office smashed earlier this year by rampaging members of the security services controlled by the rival Fatah movement. "What is the reason behind this authority? A majority now says it is all a big lie." [complete article] Iran offers talks on nuclear issueBy John Ward Anderson, Washington Post, September 13, 2006 Iran's confidential response three weeks ago to an international proposal over its nuclear program offered extensive negotiations to resolve the standoff, but only if proceedings against Iran in the U.N. Security Council were stopped. In a detailed and sometimes rambling document given to foreign governments, Iran stopped short of rejecting demands to halt its nuclear enrichment program, saying the issue could be resolved in talks. The response, closely held for weeks, was made public on a Web site Monday. "The Islamic Republic of Iran does not intend to reject the whole issue unilaterally, and is ready to provide an opportunity for both sides to share their viewpoints on this issue and try to convince each other and reach a mutual understanding," the document says. [complete article] House GOP leaders fight wiretapping limitsBy Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post, September 13, 2006 House leaders moved yesterday to temper many of the controls that a bill headed toward rapid passage would have imposed on the Bush administration's program for wiretapping terrorism suspects without court approval. The bill, set for Judiciary Committee consideration today, would have forced the administration to seek a warrant for surveillance within 60 days and bolstered consultations with Congress on the program. But last-minute changes pushed by senior Republicans may allow warrantless surveillance to largely continue without those controls. Instead, House Republican leaders brought their bill in line with legislation agreed to by the White House and the Senate, which would allow but not require the administration to submit the program to a secret court for a constitutional review. [complete article] Democrats call NSA's input to Senate panel inappropriateBy Walter Pincus, Washington Post, September 13, 2006 Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee are complaining that the National Security Agency has played politics in support of the secret program to intercept phone calls between alleged terrorists in the United States and abroad. On July 27, shortly after most members of the committee were briefed on the controversial surveillance program, the NSA supplied the panel's chairman, Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), with "a set of administration approved, unclassified talking points for the members to use," as described in the document. Among the talking points were "subjective statements that appear intended to advance a particular policy view and present certain facts in the best possible light," Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) said in a letter to the NSA director. [complete article] What 9/11 means to IraqisBy Ali Hamdani, The Times, September 12, 2006 For Iraqis, 9/11 led us to our current life of death and destruction. A sad moment for Americans was the reason for a sad life for us. With 3,000 civilians killed every four weeks, my country suffers its own 9/11 on a monthly basis. A few months before 9/11 my sister bought some American medical books because she was planning to study in the States. I called her after I saw the towers burning on TV and said: "Forget it - you are not going to make it there any more." How would it affect our life? Or how my people would come to suffer for Saudis attacking American buildings? I didn't bother finding answers for all these questions that day. The only thing I said to my sister before ending the conversation: "We will be in big trouble soon." Last week thugs tortured and killed my friend Mahmoud, a 51 year old father of three children, just for being an unlucky Shia who by accident drove by a Sunni neighborhood. To me those thugs are no different from the American soldiers who killed the family of a 10-year-old girl named Iman in Haditha last November. I think about Iman watching her parents die. Then I remember seeing the body of my friend Mahmoud last week at the morgue, with burns and bruises covering every part of his body. Terror is terror, no matter how it is dressed up, or who performs the act. Terrorists don't need to wear balaclavas or grow beards. They sometimes come in proper uniforms, and call themselves Marines, like the 10-year old- girl's family killers. Whether it was the collapse of the Twin Towers or the missile from an F-16 plane hitting a wedding party in Anbar in the west of Iraq more than a year ago, innocent people have lost their lives. The other night, I was watching a documentary on the Al-Jazeera satellite news channel about the September 11 attack. Listening to the stories told by the survivors was terrifying for me. The scene of that airplane hitting the tower was as horrible as the scene of the wreckage of a red old Passat car that I saw after it was run over by an American tank in west Baghdad in 2004, crushing the mother, father and their young child. Those people who died under the rubble of the Twin Towers looked similar to those Iraqis who died under the American barrage. We all lost loved ones - but here we continue to lose them. Who knows why President Bush, Saddam Hussein and even Bin Laden did what they did? But Americans need to understand that 9/11 is not only theirs anymore, after they chose to make the suffering sharable. At least in their case they still have the chance every year to hold a memorial for the sad event and to pray for the victims. For us the event is still going on - and it's not clear yet who should be praying for whom, as any of us is a victim waiting for his 9/11 to come. Life in Iraq wasn't great under Saddam but there was only one way to suffer, decided by the dictator. With the American freedom that was offered to my nation, people got the choice of how to suffer, but to suffer is a must. Freedom can not be offered to a dead nation. Unfortuanately, what America was looking for has never been in my country. Now I sit in Baghdad and listen to American commentators debating about whether their nation is now safer. It probably is, but they have messed up our lives, as if they exported their troubles to us. IDF commander: We fired more than a million cluster bombs in LebanonBy Meron Rappaport, Haaretz, September 12, 2006 "What we did was insane and monstrous, we covered entire towns in cluster bombs," the head of an IDF rocket unit in Lebanon said regarding the use of cluster bombs and phosphorous shells during the war. Quoting his battalion commander, the rocket unit head stated that the IDF fired around 1,800 cluster bombs, containing over 1.2 million cluster bomblets. In addition, soldiers in IDF artillery units testified that the army used phosphorous shells during the war, widely forbidden by international law. According to their claims, the vast majority of said explosive ordinance was fired in the final 10 days of the war. The rocket unit commander stated that Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) platforms were heavily used in spite of the fact that they were known to be highly inaccurate. MLRS is a track or tire carried mobile rocket launching platform, capable of firing a very high volume of mostly unguided munitions. The basic rocket fired by the platform is unguided and imprecise, with a range of about 32 kilometers. The rockets are designed to burst into sub-munitions at a planned altitude in order to blanket enemy army and personnel on the ground with smaller explosive rounds. The use of such weaponry is controversial mainly due to its inaccuracy and ability to wreak great havoc against indeterminate targets over large areas of territory, with a margin of error of as much as 1,200 meters from the intended target to the area hit. The cluster rounds which don't detonate on impact, believed by the United Nations to be around 40% of those fired by the IDF in Lebanon, remain on the ground as unexploded munitions, effectively littering the landscape with thousands of land mines which will continue to claim victims long after the war has ended. [complete article] Comment -- Last week Ehud Olmert challenged his Israeli critics by saying, "The claim that we lost is unfounded. Half of Lebanon is destroyed; is that a loss?"While over the coming years, these American-manufactured cluster bomblets continue to maim and kill Lebanese children, Olmert and his friends in Washington should see the carnage as constant reminders of Israel's success in his war of choice. Democrats answer CheneyBy E. J. Dionne Jr., Washington Post, September 12, 2006 [Recent] speeches [by John Kerry and Joe Biden] reflect a growing consensus within a broad swath of Democratic opinion: First, that Iraq is a blind alley, a distraction from the war on terrorism, not its "central front." Second, that the United States needs a responsible way to disengage from Iraq, reengage in Afghanistan and prepare itself to deal with the rising power of Iran, so far a real winner from Bush's Iraq policies. The administration, in the meantime, is offering -- stasis. It seems to define victory as maintaining our troops in Iraq through the end of Bush's term without telling us exactly why doing so will make the situation there any better. A debate about alternative futures is what the country needs. Who can be surprised that Vice President Cheney doesn't want it to happen? [complete article] Comment -- What's pathetic about Cheney's desire to stifle debate is that his administration feels threatened by the lamest forms of dissent. And what's disturbing about the Democratic "alternatives" is that they make it sound like all we have to decide about is which is our favorite war.When oh when, is someone in Washington going to have the guts to challenge the terror/war narrative?! Al Qaeda has no need to launch any more attacks; Washington is happy to do the job for them. For five years America has very effectively been terrorized by its own leaders. The national security threat that no one wants to address is the one created by the United States' propensity to create enemies. The canard that so many in this country are so willing to swallow is the idea that anti-Americanism is rooted in envy and the hatred of freedom, yet America has a habit of inserting itself into the lives of people who would otherwise happily give not a single thought to this nation or its citizens. That doesn't mean that America should isolate itself but simply that it should stop having such a flagrant disregard for the well-being of others and the health planet on which we all depend. Four killed in attack outside U.S. embassy in SyriaBy Rhonda Roumani and Debbi Wilgoren, Washington Post, September 12, 2006 At least three armed assailants and a Syrian security guard were killed Tuesday outside the U.S. Embassy building here in what Syrian authorities said was a foiled plot to storm the compound. No Americans were injured. An explosion was heard about 10 a.m. (3 a.m. EDT) on the street outside the embassy, officials said. Although the area was quickly cordoned off to journalists, the charred remains of a parked vehicle could be seen, along with pools of blood. At one point, a plume of smoke was visible from inside the embassy compound. Syrian officials said one Syrian security guard was killed, and another critically injured, in the effort to stop the planned attack. They said the attackers appeared to be religious extremists, who shouted "Allahu Ahkbar! (God is Great) during the confrontation. [complete article] U.S. hopes Syria will join war on terror after embassy attackBy Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, September 12, 2006 The United States, which has long had tense relations with Syria, expressed gratitude on Tuesday to the Syrian government for going after men who attacked the U.S. Embassy in Damascus and said it hopes Syria will join the war on terror. "Syrian officials came to the aid of the Americans, the U.S. government is grateful for the assistance the Syrians provided in going after the attackers," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. "We are hoping they will become an ally and make the choice of fighting against terrorists." [complete article] Top aide to Sadr outlines vision of a U.S.-free IraqBy Ellen Knickmeyer and Sudarsan Raghavan, Washington Post, September 12, 2006 In a shabby but spotless living room in the holy city of Najaf, a top deputy of Shiite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr quietly sketched out his vision of the Iraq to come, after the Americans withdraw. First, "there will be a civil war," said the aide, Mustafa Yaqoubi, as his three young children wandered in and out of the room. The rising violence and rival |