BLOG POSTS

The argument whether or not to endorse George W Bush’s plan and send more troops to Iraq, hinges on the idea – extolled this morning by Cheney on Fox, and McCain on NBC – that any phased withdrawal from Iraq would be catastrophic because it would increase Iranian influence in the region and support bin Laden’s view that Americans had no stomach for the fight.

Such a notion is only viable if a) increased Iranian influence in the region will lead to more instability, and aggression towards the West, and b) if anyone gives a tinker’s cuss what bin Laden really believes.

The issue of Iran has been hyped beyond belief by this administration. Certainly, Ahmadinejad is no friend of America, but then if he were he would hardly be welcome in his own country, given the long-standing, aggressive, US stance towards that nation. Post 9/11 rumors of a link between Iran and the al Qaeda terrorists responsible for the attacks resulted from confessions we now know to have been extracted under torture and are implausible, given that neither (Shia) Iran and (Shia) Hezbollah have ever indicated any open support for al Qaeda. Though this present administration would have us think otherwise.

Certainly, the (Sunni) Saudis are concerned about a more influential Iran, to the extent they have threatened to support the Sunni insurgency in Iraq if the US were to begin withdrawing troops. It begs the question: is George W Bush defying his people and the majority of his government over this issue because he is convinced his troop “surge” is in America’s interests, or those of his mentor, Saudi Arabia.

From an article in the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram recently, Salah Hemeid writes:

“Earlier this month more than 30 prominent Saudi Islamic clerics called on Sunni Muslims around the Middle East to support their brethren in Iraq against Shias. The clerics said: “what has been taken by force can only be regained by force,” a clear reference to increasing Shia control of Iraq.”

While Hemeid points out at some length the possibility of a Shia uprising throughout the Middle East if Iran achieves key-player status in Iraq, one gets the impression of a somewhat premature Sunni nervousness. Egypt is a Sunni nation but with strong Shia leanings, having been founded on a Shia base. Hemeid may be overly cautious.

Certainly a (Shia) Iraq banded with (Shia) Iran and Syria could be construed as a threat on (Sunni) Saudi’s borders, but this was bound to happen one day, anyway. Saddam would not have ruled forever, and on his demise the infighting would likely have proved as bad as it is today – even without the interference of the United States and Britain.

So why then is George W Bush defying his people and his government to increase troop numbers, rather than withdrawing and leaving the region to sort out its own problems? What is so important that he is prepared to risk more American lives in order to gain further control in Baghdad?

There can be only two answers: Israel – and oil.

If a stable future for the region was at the forefront of George W Bush’s mind, he would instigate the proposals of the Iraq Study Group by beginning political dialogue with Iran and Syria, phasing in a gradual withdrawal of US troops, and turning his attention to solving the Israeli/Palestinian issue once and for all. By those actions, he would be seen as a mentor in the region rather than an aggressor. It would involve squaring up to the strong Jewish lobby in Washington who have no wish to see an Israeli/Palestinian settlement, but even if he was not totally successful, history and the Arabs might well forgive him for his previous Iraqi blunders.

Of course, that’s not going to happen. The reason, apart from subjugation to the Israel lobby, is Iraqi oil.

Sparrow Chat reported recently that behind the back’s of ordinary Iraqis, Maliki’s government is pushing through a US-drafted bill that will effectively hand over control of the Iraqi oilfields to US interests. Those interests need a stable Iraq, or at least one so militarily strangled that any insurgency can be effectively stifled.

If the Iranians gain control of Iraq they are unlikely to allow the US to walk away with the oil, and more Iranian influence in the region is seen as directly against Israel’s interests. Ahmadinejad has already proclaimed he will wipe that nation from the face of the earth. Although such political utterances can seem drastic and sweeping, in reality the Iranian president’s statement was nothing more than a counter to George W Bush’s declaration of his “Axis of Evil”.

An upsurge in Iranian influence would undoubtedly pressure Israel to settle the Palestinian issue if it ever wishes to have any peace within its own, still unresolved, boundaries. Admittedly, Palestinians are Sunni in the majority – Hamas and the PLO are both Sunni organizations – but as was shown only recently in Israel’s abortive war with Lebanon over (Shia) Hezbollah, when it comes to a crunch – they are all Arabs together.

That is one fact George W Bush would do well to remember.

Filed under: Mis-calculations

America’s aggressive excursion into the Middle East – the catastrophe that will go down in history simply as “Bush’s War” – has been dotted by milestones of inefficiency and downright blundering. From the moment US troops climbed Saddam’s statue in Firdos Square, Central Baghdad, and draped the Stars & Stripes instead of the Iraqi flag, through the massacres of Haditha and Falluja; the shameful photos of Abu Ghraib’s torturers; the gunning-down of an innocent Iraqi family and subsequent raping and killing of a fourteen year old girl by US soldiers; the blot of Guantanamo Bay Detention Center …….to today’s announcement by the Iraqi government that the six Iranians captured yesterday, after the storming of an Iranian Consulate building in Irbil by US troops, were in the country quite legitimately and with the approval of the Iraqi authorities.

American citizens may be shocked to learn that the US military over the years has made a habit of “doing its own thing” without prior consultation with allies, often creating a political mess others have had to clear up.

The problem is a simple one. It’s called ‘arrogance’. It’s a basic mis-comprehension that America’s military knows best and the rest of the human race is inferior. This attitude begins with the highest officials and permeates down via the non-commissioned officers to the lower ranks. It leads to decisions being made without recourse to intelligence from outside sources. In this instance, the Iraqi government was obviously not consulted before the raid on Irbil – a raid that could easily have led to unnecessary deaths.

Ask any citizen of another country to sum up their opinion of Americans in one word, and the answer will most likely be “Arrogant”. This, of course, is grossly unfair. A large proportion of the US population have not fallen victim to such a character defect, but human beings form opinions based on acquired knowledge, and that is usually obtained through media services that rarely allow John Doe a soapbox. Invariably, only politicians and military actions make headline news around the world.

Couple arrogance with the lawlessness of war, throw in the negating aspect of an army losing the fight, when losing is unthinkable, and you have the emotional mix from which atrocities are distilled.

Despite the rhetoric of US politicians and a mindset that allows no criticism of “our brave boys defending the flag”, the US military is not the supreme fighting force Americans in general are indoctrinated into believing. It is superior to others in two ways: numbers and technology. But it’s badly-funded, poorly-trained, and undisciplined. The sheer volume and scale of its misdeeds in Iraq over the last four years is proof of that. It can be argued that all armies commit atrocities in time of war, but none to the extent that has been so obvious in this conflict, unless one goes back to the last time America waged a foreign war – in Vietnam. America has never revealed to its citizens the full horror of US atrocities in that conflict. Those who have tried have been humiliated.

America’s defeat in Iraq has been because of arrogance. From Commander-in-Chief down to the lowliest private, the mindset was always one of “walk-in and take over”; the expectation – that Iraqis would swoon at their feet and call them “Masser”.

Unfortunately for America and George W Bush, the Iraqis – though different – are not inferior, and resented being stamped all over by shade-sporting, helmeted, weapon-toting foreigners, who arrogantly pushed them around. Winning hearts and minds has never been one of the American military’s highest scoring test results. In fact, they rank somewhere near the bottom of the class in spreading love and respect towards others.

America needs to shed its arrogant attitude towards the rest of the world. Then, it might have the greatest military on earth. American arrogance alone guarantees it’s defeat in the Middle East.

If only that attitude had been different from the start. Iraqis wanted Saddam overthrown; they welcomed it. American arrogance ruined it.

But then, without the arrogance – they probably wouldn’t have gone into Iraq in the first place.

Filed under: Schoolyard bullies

Whitney Houston has fallen on hard times. The chill wind of poverty is gusting around her vitals – quite literally, for Whitney has been forced to auction her panties.

Apparently, the singer kept an assortment of bric a brac in storage from tours dating back to 1994. On Wednesday, a judge ordered it to be auctioned after the storage company sought legal redress for non-payment of fees.

The whole sorry story is a lesson to young people tempted by the drug and alcohol scene. Houston’s alleged addiction to drugs, alcohol and eating disorders has ruined, not only her career, but her life.

“Stay Free Of Drugs” is the message – or you, too, may lose your knickers.

More from the Guardian story HERE.

Filed under: naked truth