"Evictions May Foreshadow Civil War"

Originally Posted by Bushra Juhi

"BAGHDAD, Iraq Mar 1, 2006 (AP)— The sectarian cleansing that drove 68-year-old Abbas al-Saiedi from his home may be as alarming a sign of a country on the brink of civil war as the killings that have swept Iraq in the past week.

Masked gunmen carrying rocket-propelled grenade launchers and automatic rifles kicked down the gate at his house, fired into the air and told the Shiite he had 48 hours to get his family out of the predominantly Sunni neighborhood in west Baghdad.

Al-Saiedi's story, a tale of fear and desperation told to The Associated Press on Wednesday, represents a growing phenomenon of religious cleansing in which members of each Muslim sect are driving the others from neighborhoods where they have long lived side by side."

I can't remember if I or anyone else mentioned it, but intermarriage has fallen off since the invasion as well (in addition to the fact that the much-vaunted rate of intermarriage - about 20% - was as high among Yugoslavians, and didn't especially help to prevent a civil war).

But don't you know, HC has told us that the Iraq War is "going as well as could be expected". The liberal MsM is just emphasizing the negative. I mean, most Iraqis are still alive, aren't they?

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

But don't you know, HC has told us that the Iraq War is "going as well as could be expected". The liberal MsM is just emphasizing the negative. I mean, most Iraqis are still alive, aren't they?

Like totally. The libs are making it all up.

"Sectarian Slaughter Sets Iraq on Road to Schism"

Originally Posted by James Hider

"The silent and insidious process of segregation cuts both ways. In a Sunni district of Baghdad called Radwaniyah, Imad al-Hamdani told The Times of the deadly pressure that drove him from his home in a Shia part of Amel, a mixed district in the south of the capital where about 40 Sunni families lived.

“All the Sunni families have left now because of both governmental and local intimidation,” he said, referring to death threats, regular house raids by security forces under the control of the Shia-dominated Interior Ministry, the arrest and torture of Sunni men and the murder of more than thirty-five shopkeepers in just three months last summer.

“It happened in a very organised way,” he said. “It started when Interior Ministry commandos conducted a very big operation in my neighbourhood. They raided all the Sunni houses in one night, and arrested all the men.”

Mr al-Hamdani was arrested with his brothers and brother-in-law. He said that the latter had been tortured so badly — he had holes drilled in his chin, his back fractured and legs broken — that he died in custody.

“They kept torturing us for nearly three weeks without interrogating us, or telling us why we were there,” he said. “Then they took me and my brothers to the interrogation room. The interrogator said to us that we should leave the area where we live and move to another one because we were Sunni.”

The legacy of the Boomer Republicons...

Originally Posted by Linus

"Sectarian Slaughter Sets Iraq on Road to Schism"

Originally Posted by James Hider

"The silent and insidious process of segregation cuts both ways. In a Sunni district of Baghdad called Radwaniyah, Imad al-Hamdani told The Times of the deadly pressure that drove him from his home in a Shia part of Amel, a mixed district in the south of the capital where about 40 Sunni families lived.

“All the Sunni families have left now because of both governmental and local intimidation,” he said, referring to death threats, regular house raids by security forces under the control of the Shia-dominated Interior Ministry, the arrest and torture of Sunni men and the murder of more than thirty-five shopkeepers in just three months last summer.

“It happened in a very organised way,” he said. “It started when Interior Ministry commandos conducted a very big operation in my neighbourhood. They raided all the Sunni houses in one night, and arrested all the men.”

Mr al-Hamdani was arrested with his brothers and brother-in-law. He said that the latter had been tortured so badly — he had holes drilled in his chin, his back fractured and legs broken — that he died in custody.

“They kept torturing us for nearly three weeks without interrogating us, or telling us why we were there,” he said. “Then they took me and my brothers to the interrogation room. The interrogator said to us that we should leave the area where we live and move to another one because we were Sunni.”

The legacy of the Boomer Republicons...

Segregation, isn't this where the GOP sends in the Federal Troops? Oh, I see...never mind. :oops:

The latest on Iraq:
http://www.metronews.ca/reuters_inte....asp?id=134233
http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?f...id=7807&acat=6

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

The latest on Iraq:
http://www.metronews.ca/reuters_inte....asp?id=134233
http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?f...id=7807&acat=6

Remember, Fox News tells us that civil war in Iraq is a "media invention", or no, now its a "good thing". :?

This is pretty amazing. From the National Journal.

ADMINISTRATION
What Bush Was Told About Iraq

By Murray Waas, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Thursday, March 2, 2006

Two highly classified intelligence reports delivered directly to President Bush before the Iraq war cast doubt on key public assertions made by the president, Vice President Cheney, and other administration officials as justifications for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein, according to records and knowledgeable sources.


The president received highly classified intelligence reports containing information at odds with his justifications for going to war.



Policy Council: Sponsored Links

Position papers, expert contacts and other resources from Policy Council members are available below.



The first report, delivered to Bush in early October 2002, was a one-page summary of a National Intelligence Estimate that discussed whether Saddam's procurement of high-strength aluminum tubes was for the purpose of developing a nuclear weapon.

Among other things, the report stated that the Energy Department and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research believed that the tubes were "intended for conventional weapons," a view disagreeing with that of other intelligence agencies, including the CIA, which believed that the tubes were intended for a nuclear bomb.

The disclosure that Bush was informed of the DOE and State dissents is the first evidence that the president himself knew of the sharp debate within the government over the aluminum tubes during the time that he, Cheney, and other members of the Cabinet were citing the tubes as clear evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program. Neither the president nor the vice president told the public about the disagreement among the agencies.

When U.S. inspectors entered Iraq after the fall of Saddam's regime, they determined that Iraq's nuclear program had been dormant for more than a decade and that the aluminum tubes had been used only for artillery shells.

The second classified report, delivered to Bush in early January 2003, was also a summary of a National Intelligence Estimate, this one focusing on whether Saddam would launch an unprovoked attack on the United States, either directly, or indirectly by working with terrorists.

The report stated that U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously agreed that it was unlikely that Saddam would try to attack the United States -- except if "ongoing military operations risked the imminent demise of his regime" or if he intended to "extract revenge" for such an assault, according to records and sources.

The single dissent in the report again came from State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, known as INR, which believed that the Iraqi leader was "unlikely to conduct clandestine attacks against the U.S. homeland even if [his] regime's demise is imminent" as the result of a U.S. invasion.

On at least four earlier occasions, beginning in the spring of 2002, according to the same records and sources, the president was informed during his morning intelligence briefing that U.S. intelligence agencies believed it was unlikely that Saddam was an imminent threat to the United States.

However, in the months leading up to the war, Bush, Cheney, and Cabinet members repeatedly asserted that Saddam was likely to use chemical or biological weapons against the United States or to provide such weapons to Al Qaeda or another terrorist group.

The Bush administration used the potential threat from Saddam as a major rationale in making the case to go to war. The president cited the threat in an address to the United Nations on September 12, 2002, in an October 7, 2002, speech to the American people, and in his State of the Union address on January 28, 2003.

The one-page documents prepared for Bush are known as the "President's Summary" of the much longer and more detailed National Intelligence Estimates that combine the analysis and judgments of agencies throughout the intelligence community.

An NIE, according to the Web site of the National Intelligence Council -- the interagency group that coordinates the documents' production -- represents "the coordinated judgments of the Intelligence Community regarding the likely course of future events" and is written with the goal of providing "policy makers with the best, unvarnished, and unbiased information -- regardless of whether analytic judgments conform to U.S. policy." (The January 2003 NIE, for example, was titled "Nontraditional Threats to the U.S. Homeland Through 2007.")

As many as six to eight agencies, foremost among them the CIA, the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the INR, contribute to the drafting of an NIE. If any one of those intelligence agencies disagrees with the majority view on major conclusions, the NIE includes the dissenting view.

The one-page summary for the president allows intelligence agencies to emphasize what they believe to be the conclusions from the broader NIE that are the most important to communicate to the commander-in-chief.

The President's Summary is among the most highly classified papers in the government. References to the summaries are contained in footnotes in the so-called Robb-Silberman report -- officially, the report of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction -- that was issued in March 2005 on the use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. The White House has refused to declassify the summaries or to give them to congressional committees.

The summaries stated that both the Energy and State departments dissented on the aluminum tubes question. This is the first evidence that Bush was aware of the intense debate within the government during the time that he, Cheney, and members of the Cabinet were citing the procurement of the tubes as evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program.

In his address to the U.N. General Assembly on September 12, 2002, the president asserted, "Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon."

On October 7, 2002, less than a week after Bush was given the summary, he said in a speech in Cincinnati: "Evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his 'nuclear mujahedeen' -- his nuclear holy warriors.... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

On numerous other occasions, Cheney, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and then-U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte cited Iraq's procurement of aluminum tubes without disclosing that the intelligence community was split as to their end use. The fact that the president was informed of the dissents by Energy and State is also significant because Rice and other administration officials have said that Bush did not know about those dissenting views when he made claims about the purported uses for the tubes.

On July 11, 2003, aboard Air Force One during a presidential trip to Africa, Rice was asked about the National Intelligence Estimate and whether the president knew of the dissenting views among intelligence agencies regarding Iraq's procurement of the aluminum tubes.

Months earlier, disagreement existed within the administration over how to characterize the aluminum tubes in a speech that then-Secretary of State Colin Powell gave to the U.N. on February 5, 2003. Breaking ranks with others in the administration, Powell decided to refer to the internal debate among government agencies over Iraq's intended use of the tubes.

Asked about this by a reporter on Air Force One, Rice said: "I'm saying that when we put [Powell's speech] together... the secretary decided that he would caveat the aluminum tubes, which he did.... The secretary also has an intelligence arm that happened to hold that view."

Rice added, "Now, if there were any doubts about the underlying intelligence to that NIE, those doubts were not communicated to the president, to the vice president, or to me."

The one-page October 2002 President's Summary specifically told Bush that although "most agencies judge" that the use of the aluminum tubes was "related to a uranium enrichment effort... INR and DOE believe that the tubes more likely are intended for conventional weapons uses."

The lengthier NIE -- more than 90 pages -- contained significantly more detail describing the disagreement between the CIA and the Pentagon's DIA on one hand, which believed that the tubes were meant for centrifuges, and State's INR and the Energy Department, which believed that they were meant for artillery shells. Administration officials had said that the president would not have read the full-length paper. They also had said that many of the details of INR's dissent were contained in a special text box that was positioned far away from the main text of the report.

But the one-page summary, several senior government officials said in interviews, was written specifically for Bush, was handed to the president by then-CIA Director George Tenet, and was read in Tenet's presence.

In addition, Rice, Cheney, and dozens of other high-level Bush administration policy makers received a highly classified intelligence assessment, known as a Senior Executive Memorandum, on the aluminum tubes issue. Circulated on January 10, 2003, the memo was titled "Questions on Why Iraq Is Procuring Aluminum Tubes and What the IAEA Has Found to Date."

The paper included discussion regarding the fact that the INR, Energy, and the United Nations atomic energy watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, all believed that Iraq was using the aluminum tubes for conventional weapons programs.

The lengthier NIE also contained a note regarding the aluminum tubes disagreement:

"In INR's view, Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes is central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, but INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors. INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.

"INR considers it far more likely that the tubes are intended for another purpose, most likely the production of artillery rockets."

One week after Rice's comments aboard Air Force One, on July 18, 2003, the Bush administration declassified some portions of the NIE, including the passage quoted above, regarding INR's dissent regarding the aluminum tubes.

But the Bush administration steadfastly continued to refuse to declassify the President's Summary of the NIE, which in the words of one senior official, is the "one document which illustrates what the president knew and when he knew it." The administration also refused to furnish copies of the paper to congressional intelligence committees.

That a summary was also prepared for Bush on the question of Saddam's intentions regarding an unprovoked attack on the United States is significant because the administration has claimed that the president was unaware of intelligence information that conflicted with his public statements and those of the vice president and members of his Cabinet on the justifications for attacking Iraq.

According to interviews and records, Bush personally read the one-page summary in Tenet's presence during the morning intelligence briefing, and the two spoke about it at some length. Sources familiar with the summary said it was highly significant that the president was informed that it was the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence agencies participating in the production of the January 2003 NIE that Saddam was unlikely to consider attacking the U.S. unless Iraq was attacked first.

Cheney received virtually the same intelligence information, according to the same records and interviews. The president's summaries have been shared with the vice president as a matter of course during the Bush presidency.

The conclusion among intelligence agencies that Saddam was unlikely to consider attacking the United States unless attacked first was also outlined in Senior Executive Intelligence Briefs, highly classified daily intelligence papers distributed to several hundred executive branch officials and to the congressional intelligence oversight committees.

During the second half of 2002, the president and vice president repeatedly cited the threat from Saddam in their public statements. "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us," Cheney declared on August 26, 2002, to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

In his September 12 address to the U.N. General Assembly, Bush said: "With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September the 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors."

In an October 7 address to the nation, Bush cited intelligence showing that Iraq had a fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons. "We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States," the president declared.

"We know that Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America," he added. "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints."

In his January 28, 2003, State of the Union address, the president once again warned the nation: "Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

In March 2003, as American, British, and other military forces prepared to invade Iraq, the president repeated the warnings during a summit in the Azores islands of Portugal and in a March 17 speech to the nation on the eve of the war. "The danger is clear: Using chemical, biological, or, one day, nuclear weapons obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country," Bush said in the March 17 speech. "The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it."

Senior Bush administration officials say they had good reason to disbelieve the intelligence that was provided to them by the CIA, noting that the intelligence the agency had provided earlier regarding Iraq was flawed.

And more recently, a 511-page bipartisan report by the Senate Intelligence Committee on prewar intelligence regarding Iraq concluded: "Despite four decades of intelligence reporting on Iraq, there was little useful intelligence collected that helped analysis determine the Iraqi regime's possible links with Al Qaeda."

The White House declined to comment for this story. In a statement, Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the National Security Council said, "The president of the United States has talked about this matter directly, as have a myriad of other administration officials. At this juncture, we have nothing to add to that body of information."

The 9/11 commission concluded in its final report that no evidence existed of a "collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Al Qaeda, adding, "Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with Al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States."

-- Previous coverage of pre-war intelligence and the CIA leak investigation from Murray Waas. Brian Beutler provided research assistance for this report.

David K '47

David, could you supply a link? I'd love to save that.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

David, could you supply a link? I'd love to save that.

http://hotstory.nationaljournal.com/...es/0302nj1.htm

Leadership crisis as Iraq anarchy reigns:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...icle348925.ece

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

David, could you supply a link? I'd love to save that.

http://hotstory.nationaljournal.com/...es/0302nj1.htm

Thanks David.

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

Leadership crisis as Iraq anarchy reigns:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...icle348925.ece

Not good. But I suppose this is a mere "media creation". Things are actually going quite well in Iraq.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

Leadership crisis as Iraq anarchy reigns:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...icle348925.ece

Not good. But I suppose this is a mere "media creation". Things are actually going quite well in Iraq.

There is, dare I say it, a Vietnam parallel here. For about 18 months after the overthrow of Diem we were looking for a South Vietnmaese government that really wanted to fight the war. In the end, in the late spring of '65, it had to be a military government--an option not available in Iraq.

David K '47

. . . .than I found this on Yahoo. Very reassuring I must say.

Iraq Violence Called a Blow to U.S. Goals

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer 1 hour, 48 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Bloodshed among religious sects is a blow to the U.S.-backed goal of a broadly representative Iraqi government, though the immediate threat of civil war has seemingly passed, top U.S. civilian and military officials said Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Sectarian attacks and reprisal killings that began with the bombing of a revered Shiite mosque are troubling, but do not necessarily portend further violence, James Jeffrey, senior adviser for
Iraq to Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice, said in an Associated Press interview.

"It indicates that the path to national reconciliation and the path to a national compact that we're striving so much for has a ways to go. It means we better continue working and work harder on it," Jeffrey said.

Jeffrey discounted the threat of an all-out civil war but warned that the volatile situation could worsen.

"There is still the risk of sectarian attacks" double or triple the scale of what Iraq witnessed before the Feb. 22 mosque bombing in Samarra, he said. "If they were to grow worse then I think we would have a different situation."

In a briefing from Baghdad to reporters at the
Pentagon, Gen. George Casey said, "Now, it appears that the crisis has passed."

Casey, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, added, "We all should be clear: Iraqis remain under threat of terrorist attack by those who will stop at nothing to undermine the formation of the constitutionally elected government."

Along with the increased level of violence, the scale of targets on Sunni mosques was new, Jeffrey said.

"We were very careful neither to overplay this nor to indicate that this is just business as usual," he said. "This was a blow to the efforts to bring together the various political forces, but it also illustrates the need for them to come together as soon as possible and that's where we're focusing our efforts."

An extraordinary daytime curfew and vehicle restrictions helped curb the worst of the sectarian killing, but attacks continued this week.

Casey said military officials believe that about 350 civilians overall have been killed in the violence, though some Iraqi officials have used higher figures. Thursday's attacks alone claimed 58 lives.

"I think it's safe to say that a major attack, particularly on a religious site, would have a significant impact on the situation here coming in the next couple of days," Casey said.

Jeffrey said al-Qaida leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the "likely suspect" in the mosque bombing, although he said there is no clear evidence of that. He added that although neighboring
Iran is trying to increase its political pull among Iraq's factions, "We see no specific line that leads you directly to Iran in any of what happened in the last week and a half."

Casey said officials don't know who was behind the bombing but suspicions were focusing on al-Qaida or groups linked to it "because it meets the type of event that they have been saying that they were going to do here."

Another major attack or multiple attacks staged close together by al-Zarqawi remain a concern, said U.S. intelligence officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity. Authorities are particularly watchful for suicide bombers, a tactic used often by his group.

Even before the Samarra bombing, critics on Capitol Hill and elsewhere were growing impatient with political wrangling in Iraq that has failed to produce a new unified government following December's parliamentary election. The U.S. has hinged troop withdrawals and other long-term commitments to the prospect of the first permanent, multiethnic government following the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

The U.S. ambassador in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, has been a key back-room dealmaker in government talks, but Jeffrey said the U.S. is not playing favorites among candidates for prime minister or other posts.

He would not grade the performance of interim Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, but did not sound enthusiastic about the prospect that the Shiite politician may serve another term. Sunni, Kurdish and secular political leaders have mounted a campaign to deny al-Jaafari the job.




David K '47

___

Originally Posted by AP article

Sectarian attacks and reprisal killings that began with the bombing of a revered Shiite mosque are troubling, but do not necessarily portend further violence, James Jeffrey, senior adviser for Iraq to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said in an Associated Press interview.

"It indicates that the path to national reconciliation and the path to a national compact that we're striving so much for has a ways to go. It means we better continue working and work harder on it," Jeffrey said.

This is the "talking point" that Fox News picked up on. You know, how the recent violence is actually a "good thing". Unfrickinbelievable. It makes me really, truly wonder if Faux News, Marc Lamb, HC, KIA67, Chris '68 and their ilk would support Bush if he said "I need to suspend elections and declare martial law for reasons of [doesn't matter what- insert whatever here]".

Jeffrey discounted the threat of an all-out civil war but warned that the volatile situation could worsen.

Ah, and here is the escape hatch, where HC can deny that the above was ever said or at least meant.

Military to continue to pay Iraqi media: Casey

By Charles Aldinger Fri Mar 3, 11:44 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military will continue to pay Iraqi media to publish reports favorable to American forces following an investigation into the controversial practice, the top U.S. general in
Iraq said on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Army Gen. George Casey, commander of U.S. forces there, told reporters in a teleconference from Iraq that the investigation by a Navy admiral ordered by Casey "found that we were operating within our authorities and responsibilities."

Some members of the U.S. Congress raised questions about the payments when it was revealed in December that Iraqi journalists and newspapers were being paid to use articles produced by the military.

Casey said he had not issued an order to halt the payments.

"And, right now, based on the results of the investigation, I do not intend to in the near term," he said.

"However, we will continue to evaluate this over time as the situation on the ground here evolves."

Casey said results of the investigation by Rear Adm. Scott Van Buskirk would be announced in the coming weeks and that some "procedural recommendations" could be made.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said in recent weeks the
Pentagon had not done a good job in the information war against enemies like al Qaeda, saying U.S. personnel felt constrained partly due to fear of criticism in the media. The U.S. military has argued it is important to counter what it calls misinformation and propaganda spread by insurgents.

Van Buskirk's inquiry was announced in December after the military confirmed U.S. troops in an "information operations" task force wrote articles with positive messages about the U.S. mission that were translated from English into Arabic and placed in Iraqi newspapers in return for money.

The U.S. command in Iraq at the time said "articles have been accepted and published as a function of buying advertising and opinion/editorial space, as is customary in Iraq."

Some U.S. lawmakers have said the practice could undermine U.S. credibility as American officials try to foster democratic institutions in Iraq and tout its emerging free press.

Rumsfeld said last month that he was mistaken when he stated several days previously that the military had stopped paying Iraqi newspapers to publish pro-American articles.

I can imagine how well this is going to play on the streets of Baghdad.

David K '47

Poll: Majority of Americans Believe Iraq Civil War Likely

Originally Posted by Richard Morin

"An overwhelming majority of the public believe fighting between Sunni and Shiite Muslims in Iraq will lead to civil war and half say the United States should begin withdrawing its forces from that violence-torn country, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey found that 80 percent believed that recent sectarian violence made civil war in Iraq likely, and more than a third said such a conflict was "very likely" to occur. These expectations extend beyond party lines: More than seven in 10 Republicans and eight in 10 Democrats and political independents believe such a conflict is coming."

Someone needs to start a thread called "the end of America" or something like that, but when a national army becomes an instrument of partisanship the survival of that nation - not just as a great power, but as a unitary country in any meaningful sense - is no longer assured.

Originally Posted by A Marine

"Anyway, I had a few minutes today and thought I'd look and see what else was banned on the Marine web here. I think the results speak for themselves:

Wonkette - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.wonkette.com/) is categorized as: Forum/Bulletin Boards, Politics/Opinion."

Bill O'Reilly (www.billoreilly.com) - OK

Air America (www.airamericaradio.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion."

Rush Limbaugh (www.rushlimbaugh.com) - OK

ABC News "The Note" - OK

Website of the Al Franken Show (www.alfrankenshow.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion."

G. Gordon Liddy Show (www.liddyshow.us) - OK

Don & Mike Show (www.donandmikewebsite.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.donandmikewebsite.com/) is categorized as: Profanity, Entertainment/Recreation/Hobbies."

Link

Originally Posted by Linus

Someone needs to start a thread called "the end of America" or something like that,

That looks like a topic for Prisoner stringofnumbers (formerly Titus Sabinicus Parthicus). He's very into the end of America.

but when a national army becomes an instrument of partisanship the survival of that nation - not just as a great power, but as a unitary country in any meaningful sense - is no longer assured.

Originally Posted by A Marine

"Anyway, I had a few minutes today and thought I'd look and see what else was banned on the Marine web here. I think the results speak for themselves:

Wonkette - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.wonkette.com/) is categorized as: Forum/Bulletin Boards, Politics/Opinion."

Bill O'Reilly (www.billoreilly.com) - OK

Air America (www.airamericaradio.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion."

Rush Limbaugh (www.rushlimbaugh.com) - OK

ABC News "The Note" - OK

Website of the Al Franken Show (www.alfrankenshow.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion."

G. Gordon Liddy Show (www.liddyshow.us) - OK

Don & Mike Show (www.donandmikewebsite.com) - "Forbidden, this page (http://www.donandmikewebsite.com/) is categorized as: Profanity, Entertainment/Recreation/Hobbies."

Link

That's very interesting, even if it's not the least bit reassuring.

US Envoy to Iraq: conflict could become civil war

Originally Posted by Borzou Daragahi

BAGHDAD — The top U.S. envoy to Iraq said Monday that the 2003 toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime had opened a "Pandora's box" of volatile ethnic and sectarian tensions that could engulf the region in all-out war if America pulled out of the country too soon.

In remarks that were among the frankest and bleakest public assessments of the Iraq situation by a high-level American official, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the "potential is there" for sectarian violence to become full-blown civil war.

If this guy is still serving six months now, you can bet this statement had some official sanction.

Originally Posted by Linus

US Envoy to Iraq: conflict could become civil war

Originally Posted by Borzou Daragahi

BAGHDAD — The top U.S. envoy to Iraq said Monday that the 2003 toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime had opened a "Pandora's box" of volatile ethnic and sectarian tensions that could engulf the region in all-out war if America pulled out of the country too soon.

In remarks that were among the frankest and bleakest public assessments of the Iraq situation by a high-level American official, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the "potential is there" for sectarian violence to become full-blown civil war.

If this guy is still serving six months now, you can bet this statement had some official sanction.

Make it six days, and you're on!

At this point it's a Catch-22. If we pull out, the Iraqis will go heads-up against each other in a massive bloodbath against each other... and Al Quaeda will choose to interpret our action as "weakness" and launch another 9.11 style attack. OTOH, if we stay, they'll simply escalate the guerrilla wars against both each other AND us... and continue to use Iraq as a breeding ground for future terrorists. It's lose-lose... and no way to clearly tell which is worse.

My vote would be for the former, since Iraq was such a bad call in the first place. Let the Arab bastards think about us what they want, take back direct government control over all our vulnerable areas... ports, nuclear plants and the like... seal our border with Mexico and warn Canada that they could be next... and go for Fortress America.

Official: Shiite party suppressed body count in sectarian violence

Originally Posted by Ellen Knickmeyer

BAGHDAD, March 8 -- Days after the bombing of a Shiite shrine unleashed a wave of retaliatory killings of Sunnis, the leading Shiite party in Iraq's governing coalition directed the Health Ministry to stop tabulating execution-style shootings, according to a ministry official familiar with the recording of deaths.

The official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because he feared for his safety, said a representative of the Shiite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, ordered that government hospitals and morgues catalogue deaths caused by bombings or clashes with insurgents, but not by execution-style shootings.

A statement this week by the U.N. human rights department in Baghdad appeared to support the account of the Health Ministry official. The agency said it had received information about Baghdad's main morgue -- where victims of fatal shootings are taken -- that indicated "the current acting director is under pressure by the Interior Ministry in order not to reveal such information and to minimize the number of casualties."

The U.N. office said it had not confirmed the information about the morgue and had been unable so far to obtain an accounting of the toll from Iraqi authorities.

Spokesmen for the Health Ministry and the Supreme Council -- commonly known by its initials, SCIRI -- denied that any order to alter the tabulation of deaths had been issued.

Abductions and killings of Sunni Arab men, usually by gunshots to the back of the head, have occurred with increasing frequency over the past year and are widely blamed on government-allied Shiite religious militias and death squads alleged to be operating from inside the SCIRI-dominated Interior Ministry. In particular, Shiite militias have been accused of abducting and executing large numbers of Sunni men in the days immediately following the Feb. 22 destruction of the Askariya mosque, a revered Shiite shrine in the northern city of Samarra.

After a lull in recent days, abductions and killings flared again in Baghdad on Wednesday. Police in west Baghdad found a minibus that contained the bodies of 18 bound and strangled men, and 50 employees of an Iraqi security firm were kidnapped on the east side of the city.

The Washington Post reported on Feb. 28 that more than 1,300 shooting victims had been brought to the morgue in the first six days after the Samarra bombing. The figure was provided by a morgue worker who refused to be identified by name.

Originally Posted by Linus

Official: Shiite party suppressed body count in sectarian violence

Originally Posted by Ellen Knickmeyer

BAGHDAD, March 8 -- Days after the bombing of a Shiite shrine unleashed a wave of retaliatory killings of Sunnis, the leading Shiite party in Iraq's governing coalition directed the Health Ministry to stop tabulating execution-style shootings, according to a ministry official familiar with the recording of deaths.

The official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because he feared for his safety, said a representative of the Shiite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, ordered that government hospitals and morgues catalogue deaths caused by bombings or clashes with insurgents, but not by execution-style shootings.

A statement this week by the U.N. human rights department in Baghdad appeared to support the account of the Health Ministry official. The agency said it had received information about Baghdad's main morgue -- where victims of fatal shootings are taken -- that indicated "the current acting director is under pressure by the Interior Ministry in order not to reveal such information and to minimize the number of casualties."

The U.N. office said it had not confirmed the information about the morgue and had been unable so far to obtain an accounting of the toll from Iraqi authorities.

Spokesmen for the Health Ministry and the Supreme Council -- commonly known by its initials, SCIRI -- denied that any order to alter the tabulation of deaths had been issued.

Abductions and killings of Sunni Arab men, usually by gunshots to the back of the head, have occurred with increasing frequency over the past year and are widely blamed on government-allied Shiite religious militias and death squads alleged to be operating from inside the SCIRI-dominated Interior Ministry. In particular, Shiite militias have been accused of abducting and executing large numbers of Sunni men in the days immediately following the Feb. 22 destruction of the Askariya mosque, a revered Shiite shrine in the northern city of Samarra.

After a lull in recent days, abductions and killings flared again in Baghdad on Wednesday. Police in west Baghdad found a minibus that contained the bodies of 18 bound and strangled men, and 50 employees of an Iraqi security firm were kidnapped on the east side of the city.

The Washington Post reported on Feb. 28 that more than 1,300 shooting victims had been brought to the morgue in the first six days after the Samarra bombing. The figure was provided by a morgue worker who refused to be identified by name.

See all the things that liberal media is supressing... :twisted:

The "non civil war" continues.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule