Mr. Arkin, is there going to be any, you know, analysis in your blog? We get that 1) you don't like the idea of the surge and 2) everyone associated with it is being dishonest and therefore worthy of your disdain. However, you don't need any special expertise as a military blogger to write that stuff. Just put it on Daily Kos.

And can someone tell me what kind of blogger goes days between posts and never engages with commenters? From what I've seen, this isn't a blog, it's a minor league opinion column, unencumbered by real insight or expertise.

Hi!
[url=thanks for sharing][/url]

Hi!
[url=thanks for sharing][/url]

Hi!
[url=thanks for sharing][/url]

Thank you for allowing us to see inside your head. Did anyone ever mention something called "The Golden Rule" to you? It's a quaint little thing that says "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

"But it's fairly easy to realize that if WWII had been fought by people with the same attitudes as those expressed in ALL of the previous posts, we'd all be little "Heil, Hitler!"'s now."

As opposed to the "heil Bush" that so many conservatives favor? If the people in charge of running this war had been in charge during WWII, yeah, we would be speaking German...

After reading all the previous posts, I have decided to kill myself. Bush is the Anti-Christ, Bush is the true center of evil in our universe, Bush is responsible for (fill in your own tortured, socialist, one-world-goverment loving neo-populist BS here: ____________
GWB isn't perfect. But it's fairly easy to realize that if WWII had been fought by people with the same attitudes as those expressed in ALL of the previous posts, we'd all be little "Heil, Hitler!"'s now. Like Elvis once sang, we need "a little less talk and lot more action!"
What a bunch of idiots the left has turned out to be!! (Not that the right is any smarter...thus the crux of our conundrum).

"clear, control and retain key areas" is that the official term now for the mission? is that a subtle change from "clear, hold and rebuild"? does that new wording make a difference?

Notes from a small island : 2

A surge against an insurgency? The laws of non-classical warfare dictate that every surge has an equal or greater counter-surge. The 'insurgents' can lose 100,000 or 500,000, while the USA cannot lose more than 10,000 (this time around).

"Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it" ( George Santyana) has never been more appropriate here.

Why does no one question the motives and origins of so-called terrorism? The American establishment seem to think that groups of people both really want , for no reason beyond the pleasure of violence AND want to revert to 7th century (CE) mores and cultural values. This is a false reading of the situation and the situation has arisen from modern history.

The USA betrayed the Iranian people in 1953 by destroying the democratically elected Mossedegh government and installing the puppet 'Shah' as absolute ruler (absolutely allowed to sell Iranian oil to US/UK companies at farcical prices and absolutely allowed to buy US/UK military hardware at farcical prices. The Shah finally departed producing an equal an opposite reaction to the west in general and the USA in particular.

Then there was the establishment of the State of Isreal on Arab Palestinian land or land bought originally from Ottoman absentee landlords. We all know the story of 60 years of Israeli (funded and armed by US/UK etc) violence against the Palestinian people.

Then there is the rape of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. Support local despots ( they don't come more despotic than The Houses of Saud, Makhtum, Sabah and the rest of the lads). Rape means buying energy at prices way below its real value in return for turning a blind eye at local repressions against the poor, women, migrant labour and so on.

The betrayal of ex-colonial peoples by the USA after the WW2 was noted. Ho Chi Minh asked Truman if he could model the Vietnamese constitution (after resisting the return of the French) on the US constitution. The answer from the US was 30 years of bloody occupation and unlimited war to protect firstly French and then US interests.

The betrayal of the South American peoples. Banana fascists supported by the USA

The betrayal of the South African people under apartheid. Whitey was holding back the commies in Africa so thats OK etc.

Who else did you betray? Pacific Islanders, Phillipines, Indonesia and on an on and on.

How could such a people (The USA's people), let alone this mangled, corrupt and uber-arrogant current regime possibly help Iraqis or the Middle East in general. So why else are you expending blood (not much of your own but plenty of others) and treasure there? Can anyone tell me?

My country, Ireland relies on the USA for economic success. We are not allowed to speak out against our government's support for the USA and it's military adventures. So...we write to US blogs because what else can we do.

regards

The surge began 6 years ago....

when irresponsible Americans, mostly on the Right, acted irresponsibly and surge-voted Bush into office (not once but twice) given their crazed mob-like antipathy and hatred of Bill Clinton and so-called Liberals!

The surge in Iraq (4th time) is only a continuation of the surge to get the Republicans and Bush back into office in the late 1990's, and to run the country and the world the way they wanted them run. Well, you got what you wanted, and what do you have to say now?

Many of those who voted for him are in retreat today, albeit some still support his policies in order to save America's 'win-at-all-costs' face. Whether you are running away from Bush or not, you created this monster and he is still committed to the surge that you folks started.

Sadly, in the end it is not just Bush who will ultimately be held responsible for the deaths of Iraqi and American children; those Americans who cavalierly supported Bush will be held responsible. Bush simply gave too many Americans what he understood what they wanted in the first place a tough, no-nonsense America.

The Rev is hard at times, but it is a fact that some Americans will have to come to grips with the fact that they are responsible for the deaths of their own children by putting this man in charge.

Spoiled, self-centered and greedy war-hawk Americans (mostly on the Right) are going to have to grow up, even after this man gets out of office.

Surge is the word used by the person that never pans-out as credible. Let us call it escalation or a call for increased troop level. I mean, my God, just tell me one thing this Administration has done that has worked. Tell me one! This word game needs stopping and someone with a grasp of MKT 101 needs to see it. Read about packaging, word length, word structure, the AIDA method. When MKT 101 university textbooks (McCarthy/Perreault) tell you about the 4-Ps, namely Product, Price, Promotion and Place(aka distribution), just know that THIS administration ( www confidentialsources com) focuses on the PROMOTION chapter. We all know they do not have the PRODUCT. They are wrong on PRICE. They are wrong to increases our PLACE aka distribution of troops. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.

Casey won't be the surge-on general?

Barbara Wickwire,
Don't forget there are about 70,000 well paid mercenary gunmen in Iraq. These men are the cutting edge of the "Salvador Option" implementing the Zionist agenda in Iraq. That makes well over 200,000 gunmen doing the brutal work of an imperial occupation.

I would hope all parents of children in Iraq would join in the marches being planned to help bring our children home from Bush's mess. Let him solve it without our childrens' blood.
Carolee Luberto
Mother 2nd Lt. Anthony Luberto
82nd Airborne

Correction:
Quote from your post today.

"Meanwhile in London, the Blair government told Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that the U.S. (YOU MEAN THE U.K., no doubt) would withdraw several thousand of its troops from Iraq, reducing its presence to a mere symbol as well."

TROOP LEVELS: QUESTION, Mr. Arkin:

Following the news online for the past year very closely on Iraq, the troop levels seem to go up and down to extremes from 127,000 up to 160,000, and it gets very little attention. I've often wondered if they were really accurate. I'm a bit skeptical about the numbers and about what they are doing.

For instance, last year we heard that we had 33,000 troops in Baghdad and yet it seemed there was not much military action in the city. I wondered if they were sitting there as a precaution and if leaders were afraid of having them out on the streets because they wanted to keep troop casualties down. Then shortly after heard there were 33,000 including lots of Iraqis. Then I heard the figure of 17,000 in Baghdad. Later it was something different even while there was supposedly a surge there last fall. Is this something you might want to look into?

Another question: they've said that among the troops going into this "surge" most of them are going to be free to be combat soldiers. Usually the portion of support troops is quite high I believe, perhaps 60%. Do you know what portion of this new group will be combat troops?

I just saw on MSNBC that helicopter "crash"
was a surface to air missle. The US military suffered 29 dead this weekend.
That is the surge, casualties in this mad war for the Zionist agenda in the Mid East.
The John C. Stennis carrier battle group
left for the Persian Gulf last week. War with Iran coming soon!

I have always believed the new three stooges (Bush, Cheney, and Rove) were not competent enough from an intellectual point of view to run our country and I still do. However, I now, beyond a doubt, think none of them have the mental stability needed.

The three played politics back in October 2006 and allowed Americans to die in Iraq. Now with the "cut and blame" course many more are going to die so the three stooges can save there place in history. My apologies to the real three stooges for lowering the standards you set by applying your group name to these three men. What these new stooges, who didn't know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia until after the Iraq invasion, have done is lit the fuse to powder keg that may eventually blow up the entire Middle East with its oil in a battle between Sunni and Shia.

DC

A very proud member of the "I voted Against the Bushes Three Times Club"

Bush is becoming increasingly isolated, and it would be a bad idea if he attempted any "clever" moves. House Republicans now want a monthly report from the Administration. Bush has become a political liability for 2008.

David Kurtz's take on the surge, posted at TPM:

Remember the long-delayed National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq that the Bush Administration managed to push off completing until after the election? Well, the Administration has slow-rolled completion of the NIE past the introduction of the surge and the State of the Union address, according to Ken Silverstein at Harper's:

The situation came to a head last week, during a closed-door session of the Senate Armed Services Committee. This committee expected to be briefed on the long-awaited NIE by an official from the National Intelligence Council (NIC), which coordinates NIEs by gathering input from all of the nation's various intelligence agencies. But the NIC official turned up empty-handed and told the committee that the intelligence community hadn't been able to complete the NIE because of the many demands placed upon it by the Bush Administration to help prepare the new military strategy on Iraq. He then said that not all of the relevant agencies had offered input into the NIE process, and thus it had proven impossible to put together a finished product.

Why, yes, of course. They were too busy rolling out what they're calling a new Iraq policy to prepare the NIE which should inform creation of that new policy. That tells you everything you need to know about the surge.

Instead of the surge:

While General Patraeus is correct in focusing on 'winning the hearts and mind" (how things are decided in the long run), his command is the wrong organization to do that. One does not send armed soldiers to do a diplomats job.

So we need to......

1. Apologize for occupying Iraq, and state that the 14 enduring bases belong to Iraq beginning July 1, 2008, and stop building the new embassy, turning that over to the Iraqis beginning January 1, 2008.

2. Stop influencing the Iraqis to write into their Constitution that foreigners (the US and UK) have the right to own Iraqi oil 100%, and that the government of Iraq NEVER has the right to change that.

3. Stop influencing the Iraqis to determine what share of oil revenues go to the US, and what part are retained by the Iraqis on long term contracts. A unity government does not exist in Iraq, and such decisions are premature, and incite violence.

4. Ask for a Regional and International Conference. Acknowledge that we have no credibility in the area, and have defaulted on our ability to broker a solution. If there is to be a solution, US forces MUST WITHDRAW, and whatever happens must be as a result of the regional and international community taking leadership here.

This is what the Baker Commission recommends, and is what this administration rejects, preferring to sacrifice more Americans (and Iraqis) to preserve ego, legacy, and wealth.

BTW, it was not the US that was responsible for the first voting in Iraq, but Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. The US tried to thwart the election, but Sistani insisted upon the election this administration is NOW trying to make the American people believe happened because of them. The reason Sistani wanted the vote? He saw it as the best (and most peaceful) way to have the US military withdraw from Iraq, and
allow the Iraqis to determine their own destiny.

"The main thing is to discard the ideology that generates war"- Ludwig von Mises

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1664.shtml

"Congressional approval" and other Democratic Party deceptions

By Larry Chin

Washington's top Democrats, led by House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, issued a "warning" to President Bush "not to start a war with Iran without the approval of Congress."

Study the wording carefully: "not to start a war without the approval of Congress." The Dems are not warning the Bush administration not to start the war. Far from it. They are only asking Bush-Cheney-Rice to start it after giving Congress a piece of the action, and going through the (allegedly legitimizing) process of collusion and "consensus."

We can, therefore, assume that what the Democrats want is to be presented with another round of cooked intelligence and lies, and "closed door" backroom deals; to be informed, the same way they were informed prior to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq -- both of which the Democrats overwhelmingly approved. Perhaps the Dems want to presented with another thick pile of documents, as they were with the USAPATRIOT Act, which they also overwhelmingly approved.

The fact is, virtually every single criminal action taken by the Bush administration since 2001 has come with the approval of Congress, and the spineless Democrats. Every "war on terrrorism" atrocity. Every malodorous federal appointment. Every deathblow dealt to the Constitution. Every act of war.

The Bush administration is in the process of provoking and setting up Iran for an attack. The White House press office is lying, claiming that there is no plan to attack Iran. (But that is the job of the White House press office.) Condoleeza Rice has already admitted that Bush personally gave orders for the Iran operations "several months ago." The Dem leadership has not questioned any of these latest criminal acts.

Meanwhile, Pelosi and Reid have refused to cut or cap funding for Bush's "surge," thereby ensuring that more young Americans are sent to the Middle East meat grinder to die. They refuse to entertain the idea of impeaching any members of the Bush administration, despite the fact that impeachable offenses have occurred on a daily basis for years.

The Democrats have even done the Bush administration proud by pushing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission into law, pushing America one more step towards a full police state. Not one of the insipid legislative motions made during their first "100 Hours" means a thing next to this.
It is the Democrats, Washington's supreme enablers, who must be "held accountable," for their duplicity, and for their refusal to fulfill the only two demands Americans voters made upon them in November: stop the war, and remove the Bush administration from power.

side note....

I notice that you all at the Washington Post have been covering this....not at all.....

At any time within the next few days, the Iraqi Council of Ministers, _appointed_ by the United States, is expected to approve a new HYDROCARBON LAW, essentially drawn up by the Bush administration and its UK lackey. The new bill will radically redraw the Iraqi oil industry and throw open the doors to the third largest oil reserves in the world. It would allow the first large scale operation of foreign oil companies in the country since the industry was nationalized in 1972. If the governments parliamentary majority prevails, the law should take effect in March. As the paper notes, the law will give Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell and other carbon cronies of the White House unprecedented sweetheart deals, allowing them to pump gargantuan profits from Iraqs nominally state-owned oilfields for decades to come. This law has been in the works since the very beginning of the invasion indeed, since months before the invasion, when the Bush administration brought in Phillip Carroll, former CEO of both Shell and Fluor, the politically wired oil servicing firm, to devise contingency plans for divvying up Iraqs oil after the attack......

Where is the coverage? Arent you interested in calling this ?war? what it is, an occupation to control a commodities market and keep the Military Industrial Complex fully employed while the rest of us have our jobs shipped to fricking India?

Whoops forgot to add the link so you can hear the original song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqOCXDhOSp4

Another quagmire but few protest songs. Its time for one. The following is a revival of a Vietnam era protest song called "I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixin'-To-Die Rag" by Country Joe and the Fish with a few lyrics changed to correspond to this latest quagmire. If you're too young to know the song here's how it was sung at Woodstock (Please don't ask what Woodstock was...) Anyone wishing to improve on the new lyrics please do so:

Yeah, come on all of you women and men,
Uncle Sam needs your help again.
He's got himself in a terrible wreck
Way over yonder in old Iraq
So put down your iPods and pick up a gun,
We're gonna have a whole lotta fun.

[Chorus]:
And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
We already got Saddam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to get an urge,
Whoopee! we're all gonna surge.

Well, come on generals, let's move fast;
Your big chance has come at last.
Gotta go there so they don't come here-
and kill the terrorists and hear the cheer.
And you know that peace can only be won
When we've blown 'em all to kingdom come.
[Chorus]

Don't worry Haliburton you'll get paid.
Why man, this war is a crusade.
There's plenty good money in Iraq to be made,
By supplying the Army with the tools of the trade,
Just hope if they use some WMD,
Its during a visit of GWB.
[Chorus]

Well, come on mothers don't look back,
Pack your kids off to old Iraq.
Come on fathers, don't hesitate,
Send 'em off before it's too late
'cause you know Bush needs that middle east oil
to keep us Americans happy and loyal.
[Chorus]

The Iraqi forces, such as they are, are on the way to Baghdad not to cede the rest of the country, that's done, but because they too have figured the Americans are leaving, and they hope to get on that last chopper. When the "virtual anarchy" becomes actual anarchy, the poor sods that tied themselves to Bush's vision best be out of there.

Early warning that...

Bush to be a No-Show

On Monday, Jan. 29, the Center for the Intrepid, the rehabilitation center for wounded military personnel, on Brooke Army Medical Base in San Antonio, will open. But Bush will be missing in action.

The 65,000-square-foot center will be one of the most sophisticated rehabilitation facilities of its kind in the world. It includes some of the most technologically advnced equipment to assist service members with amputations and other severe extremity injuries, including a high-tech gait lab, a a prosthetic fabrication lab and a computer-driven, virtual-reality rehabilitation dome.

The ceremonies will be notable for what they are missing--the commander in chief.

President Bush declined an invitation to be the keynote speaker at the Jan. 29 opening. Having recently committed more combat troops to Iraq (and having already begun stationing them there--see Arkin's WaPo blog today), it would have been an "appropriate gesture" (according to our paper--appropriate gesture, my backside) for the president to acknowledge the extraordinary sacrifices of military personnel who have suffered catastrophic injuries.

(What would Hillary do? Is Laura Bush available? Actually, Bush will be sending a proxy, Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson, in his place. Wonder if Nicholson was in the Texas Air National Guard?)

The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund raised $42 million from more than 600,000 individual donors (I bet Bush was sweating bullets that maybe the American taxpayer might have to foot the bill.) to design and construct the state-of-denial (whoops, art) structure. Of the funds raised, only $900,000 is from Texas.

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

The war in Iraq and American democracy

The Bush administration's decision to press ahead with the escalation of the war in Iraq, despite overwhelming public opposition and increasing criticism in Congress, demonstrates the extent to which the executive branch of the US government now functions as an unaccountable force, disregarding the checks and balances of the traditional constitutional structure and ignoring public opinion.

Bush's claims to be fighting a war to establish democracy in Iraq are belied by the fact that his administration is shredding what remains of democratic institutions in the United States and arrogating to itself unprecedented powers to intercept telephone and email communications, authorize torture, spy on political opponents of the war, and arrest and imprison US residents without trial.

The comments of Vice President Cheney on January 14 sum up the anti-democratic posture of this government. He dismissed the significance of the mass antiwar vote in the November congressional elections, telling his interviewer, "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace, "I don't think any president worth his salt can afford to make decisions of this magnitude according to the polls."

In all previous wars waged by American imperialism over past 100-plus years, US administrations have found it necessary to mobilize public opinion behind their military efforts. An elaborate system of political provocations and media scare tactics was developed to generate support for war among the American people.

In the Spanish-American War of 1898, a press campaign against atrocities by the Spanish colonial authorities in Cuba reached its crescendo with the explosion of the battleship USS Maine in Havana harbor, portrayed as an act of war, although it was likely due to mechanical causes.

The Wilson administration paved the way to US entry into World War I with a years-long campaign over German submarine warfare in the Atlantic Ocean, using such events as the sinking of the Lusitania, an American passenger ship carrying ammunition to Great Britain.

Franklin Roosevelt required many months of political maneuvering even to obtain support for US military aid to Britain, in the form of the Lend-Lease program, in the early stages of World War II. Only the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor created the political conditions for overcoming the deep-seated popular opposition to entering the conflagration.

US entry into the Korean War was made possible by a media campaign portraying the outbreak of civil war as an invasion of South Korea by

For the rest of this article please go to:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jan2007/iraq-j20.shtml