GIs miss own weddings, baby's first words during long Iraq tour

Today we read a Yahoo! news headline

GIs miss own weddings, baby's first words during long Iraq tour

So, we can expect to be told, by the TVs, and the Bush administration, and McCain-backers, that "the surge has worked" and we are on the verge of "success" in Iraq. They will argue that the sacrifices identified in the Yahoo! News headline were worth the victory. If it takes self-delusion to get us out of Iraq, I suppose I can go along with it for a while. But really...

Success? Fewer deaths per month is "success?" The ethnic cleansing has played itself out, as over 2 million Iraqis have left the country and walls now divide newly created ethnic fifdoms that depend on local militias for security. Was this part of the plan? Is this part of the "success"? Is buying off and arming Sunnis, who were involved in the Shia ethnic cleansing, an honorable "success"? Many don't believe this "stability" will hold, given that it was effectively created by the US with pay checks and short-term interests that can change in the future.

It's as if a bee (Hussein) was buzzing around in someone's house and the US came in, without permission, to get the bee. The homeowner was glad about that in the beginning.

Then, in it's initial shock and awe, US soldiers destroyed the living room... smashed TV, chairs turned over with broken legs, stuffing torn out of cushions, walls bashed in, windows broken, reading materials and unopened mail burned. Meanwhile, the bee buzzed off into another room. Then, room by room, the US inflicts similar destruction.

Eventually the home owner intervenes to demand a say in how the US is going after the bee. The owner wants to be informed of US attacks, so at least nobody will get hurt as US soldiers, led by George W. Bush, continue to hammer away trying to get that bee.

Finally, they smash the bee! Success!

The children in the house have black eyes, swollen lips, missing teeth, worse than any bee sting. Many of the family heirlooms are completely ruined. The homeowner's spouse has left and filed for divorce. The homeowner no longer has a job and is in debt and has late bill payments, and a credit record in shambles. Success?

The soldiers lament missing their weddings and baby's first words. But the bee is dead! Was the sacrifice worth it? Is this really "success"?

The king has no clothes. Less violence in Iraq will never be "success" or "victory." US policy and actions have destroyed the society once called Iraq. Many of its antiquities and public records have been ruined. It's economic independence has been subjugated by the US in order to rid it of Hussein? Of course not. If getting rid of Hussein was the goal, the US would be gone by now.

If stability or control in the region was the goal, the US has certainly made a mess of that, tilting the balance of power toward Iran. I could go on, but the notion of "success" or "victory" in Iraq is impossible given the horrible destruction inflicted on generations by the war. We got nothing in return... the end of violence is NOT a victory, despite what McCain or the mass media pundits say. The king has no clothes when it comes to victory in Iraq.

Sources:

GIs miss own weddings, baby's first words during long Iraq tour

How Bush Started the Iraq War

Most of us believe that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) served as Bush's lynch pin for starting the war with Iraq five years ago today (March 20 in Iraq). But Bush used a different criterion to trigger the war.

The context to Bush's ultimate trigger was that the WMD inspections were going well, unless like Bush you wanted to use WMDs as the excuse for starting a war. 731 inspections between November 2002 and March 2003 had found nothing, despite using intelligence from the US. As an aside, this puts the lie to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's claim that....

We know where they are (Iraq's WMD). They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.

On March 7, 2003, Hans Blix, the UN's chief weapons inspector in Iraq, told the UN Security Council that his inspectors faced "relatively few difficulties," and

at this juncture are able to perform professional, no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance.

Asked how long it would take to address the remaining issues, Blix said it:

will not take years, nor weeks, but months.

Bush's excuse for starting the Iraq war, disarming Saddam Hussein, was seriously threatened. He had to come up with a guarantee to ensure he could have his war. At the 11th hour Bush changed his criterion for triggering a war. On March 17, 2003 Bush gave an ultimatum that he knew Hussein would not accept:

Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict.

There you have it. Bush's final excuse for starting a war of agression was that Hussein and his sons would not leave Iraq upon his demand.

Sources:

1. Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News This Week, March 30, 2003.

Vincent Buliosi, The Prosecution of George Bush for Murder. See pages 130-135 for more on this.

Why Did Saddam Hussein say "No" to Weapons Inspectors?

Actually, at the end, the inspectors weren't "kicked out" by Saddam Hussein. They left in advance of the pending US assault.

But earlier, Hussein had said no. Why? Because he was hiding something? Mel Goodman, a 24-year veteran as a CIA analyst on the Soviet Union, with 18 years experience on the faculty of the National War College, gives us a good clue why Hussein resisted the inspectors:

... you have to realize that the best source of intelligence that the CIA had, was the fact that they had operational people on the United Nations inspector teams. They had a significant number in every round of inspection. And they were there to collect intelligence, not only in terms of WMD, but on Saddam Hussein, and on a variety of Iraqi chiefs.

When the UN inspectors left, and tried to get back in after Desert Fox, the Clinton bombing attack on Iraq in 1998, Saddam Hussein said no.

Sources:

No Quarter Blog, May 24, 2007. The transcript is to appear in the in the May 25, 2007 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

The Justice in Executing Saddam Hussein

Saddam Hussein was tried and hanged for his disproportionate actions against the town of Dujail. That alone was the official justification for his execution, without consideration of gassing Kurds, secret police, torture or other acts for which he could have been tried.

It has been argued that Fallujah is Bush's Dujail. But it can also be argued that the accumulated whole of the war crimes in Iraq is Bush's Dujail.

Prime Minister Olmert of Israel has his own Dujail. It's called the disproportionate assault and collective punishment of Lebanon in July 2006.

If Justice is blind and balanced, then we should, someday, witness Bush and Olmert being punished for their Dujails.

Olmert and Hussein Cross the Same Line on Disproportionate Actions

According to the Opinion* in the verdict against Saddam Hussein, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert crossed a very similar line, thus commited crimes in his July 2006 decisions to assault Lebanon. However, in the case of Olmert, his actions were leveled against an entire county not just one town. See: Lebanon Damage Report 2006.

"Saddam’s main defense was that as a leader, he was entitled to take action against a town that had tried to assassinate him and was populated by insurgents and terrorists allied with Iran at a time when Iraq and Iran were at war. The Opinion* details why the actions taken against the town of Dujail and its inhabitants “was not necessary to stop an immediate and imminent danger” and how the actions were disproportionate to the threat. In this way, the Opinion makes clear that there is a line to be drawn in every country’s fight against terrorism, and that Saddam and the other defendants crossed that line."
-- Source: Observations on the Dujail Trial Opinion, By Michael P. Scharf, co-author of SADDAM ON TRIAL: UNDERSTANDING AND DEBATING THE IRAQI HIGH TRIBUNAL (2006)

* On December 4, 2006, the Iraqi High Tribunal publicly issued the long-awaited English translation of its Opinion supporting the November 5 Judgment in the Dujail Trial – the first trial of Saddam Hussein and seven co-defendants. Available at: Iraqi High Tribunal Opinion