Joe Hack

After the bloody humiliation America is suffering in Iraq, and with the lowest approval ratings for any president ever, you’d have thought George W Bush would have learned something. Apparently not if recent reports in the Guardian newspaper are correct. Its looking increasingly like the idiot is thinking of attacking Iran. God help us all ! Whats that you say ? Iran just happens to have the worlds second largest reserves of crude oil ? Well golly, theres a coincidence, eh ?

The hardening of policy apparently follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although, or perhaps because, the Bush administration is in deep and desperate trouble over Iraq it is now seeking to turn the focus of public attention onto Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: “Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo.”. Thats enough to send a shiver down the collective spine of the rest of the civilized world.

The White House claims that Iran, whose influence in the Middle East has increased significantly over the last six years, is intent on building a nuclear weapon and is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course you will recall that this is the same administration which stated so categorically that Iraq had WMD and viciously attacked any critics who dared question that assertion. We all remember that, don’t we ? I hope so. This is the same administration, Cheney particularly, that tried to claim Al Quaeda was a reason for the attack on Iraq despite all intelligence services saying categorically that was simply not true, that Iraq was a terrorist-free zone until after the US invasion. So we can all have absolute faith in anything the Bush administration says about Iran, right ?

Hardline vice-president, Deadeye Dick Cheney, has long favoured upping the threat of military action against Iran. The only moderate voices have been the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the defence secretary, Robert Gates. Last year Mr Bush came down in favour of Ms Rice, who along with Britain, France and Germany has been putting a diplomatic squeeze on Iran. But at a meeting of the White House, Pentagon and state department last month, Deadeye Dick Cheney expressed frustration at the lack of progress and Mr Bush sided with him. “The balance has tilted. There is cause for concern,” the source said this week.

Nick Burns, the undersecretary of state responsible for Iran and a career diplomat who is one of the main advocates of negotiation, told the meeting it was likely that diplomatic manoeuvring would still be continuing in January 2009. That assessment went down badly with Mr Cheney and Mr Bush. The Washington source said Mr Bush and Mr Cheney did not trust any potential successors in the White House, Republican or Democratic, to deal with Iran decisively. They are also reluctant for Israel to carry out any strikes because the US would get the blame in the region anyway, given that it is widely internationally peceived that Israel does not act without Washingtons tacit approval..

“The red line is not in Iran. The red line is in Israel. If Israel is adamant it will attack, the US will have to take decisive action,” Mr Cronin, Director of Studies at the ISS said. “The choices are: tell Israel no, let Israel do the job, or do the job yourself.”. Iran currently, and with some justification, feels itself to be under considerable threat from the US. Almost half of the US’s 277 warships are stationed menacingly close to Iran, including two aircraft carrier groups. The aircraft carrier USS Enterprise left Virginia last week for the Gulf. A Pentagon spokesman said it was to replace the USS Nimitz and there would be no overlap that would mean three carriers in Gulf at the same time. Stop and think for a moment about how the US would feel if there were over a hundred Iranian warships along its coastline and warlike statements were coming out of Iran. If the boot were on the other foot Americans would be very, very nervous. Thats a no-brainer.

Bush and Cheneys hardline stance is deeply unpopular internationally. There is a very clear lack of support for military action from any of Americas previous allies and it would have to be very much a case of Bush going it alone against the force of overwhelming worldwide opinion.if he indeed opts for Cheneys preferred ‘attack’ policy. Because of that no decision on military action is expected until next year and in the meantime the state department will continue to pursue the diplomatic route although given the attitudes of Bush and Cheney one can only wonder how whole-hearted this approach will really be.

Bush, who has never spoken in criticism of Israels secret nuclear arsenal and who was instrumental in sharing nuclear technology with India in contravention of long-standing US policy, is likely at some point to hype the notion of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapons capability as a justification for military action. Iran has repeated categorically that their only interest is in the development of peaceful nuclear technology. Sporadic talks are under way between the EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, on the possibility of a freeze in Iran’s uranium enrichment programme. Tehran has so far re-asserted its right to peaceful nucdlear development but has provisionally agreed to another round of talks at the end of the month. The pot simmers.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed El Baradei, has said that there are signs of Iran slowing down work on the enrichment plant it is building in Natanz. Negotiations took place in Tehran last week between Iranian officials and the IAEA, which is seeking a full accounting of Iran’s nuclear activities before Tehran disclosed its enrichment programme in 2003. The agency’s deputy director general, Olli Heinonen, said two days of talks had produced “good results” and would continue. At the UN, Bush is pushing for tougher economic sanctions against Iran but other UN member states are resisting.

We all know that Bush and Cheney have previous form for hyping up imaginary threats to justify military action. They have previous form for going against world opinion too. So its all desperately worrying. Be very watchful. If you suddenly start seeing feverish claims from the Bush camp in the tame news media about the ‘Threat of Iran’ please remember Iraq. Take nothing whatsoever on trust. Demand independent (for example the UN) verification. This is important. There have been over 600.000 lives lost in Iraq so far and theres no end in sight. We cannot afford to be lied and manipulated into another deadly debacle like that ever again.

We won’t get fooled again.

-Tags:army Bush Dick Cheney insurgency iran Iraq Israel nuclear Political Rants politics terrorism terrorist US military war on terror wmdarmy, Bush, Dick Cheney, insurgency, iran, Iraq, Israel, nuclear, Political Rants, politics, terrorism, terrorist, US military, war on terror, wmd

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

American politicians cling grimly to the public myth that the actions of the US military are always beyond criticism. Its ‘unpatriotic’ to say anything else so both Democrats and Republicans routinely lavish praise on the men and women in uniform at every turn. Oh sure, they’ll grudgingly concede, if pressed, that theres the odd bad apple at places like Abu Ghraib, but overall the US military in Iraq is a bunch of heroes doing a helluva great humanitarian job. If only it were true.

That particular fairytale will take a severe hit with the publication in ‘The Nation’ magazine of a series of in-depth interviews with 50 combat veterans of the Iraq war from right across the US. In the Nation interviews, veterans have described acts of violence in which US forces have abused or killed Iraqi men, women and children with impunity. The report avoids the easy targets, widely reported atrocities like the awful and well-documented massacre in Haditha, and instead shines a merciless spotlight on a systematic and systemic pattern of human rights abuses at all levels throughout the army. “It’s not individual atrocity,” Specialist Garett Reppenhagen, a sniper from the 263rd Armour Battalion, said. “It’s the fact that the entire war is an atrocity.

NOTE: and I can’t stress this too much. This is not some vague, anti-bush, pinko-liberal propaganda. These are the words of the men and women who have actually fought in Iraq telling it honestly like it is, unlike the sanitised propoganda you get from most of Americas tame news media.

This searing narrative of ordinary soldiers with no political axe to grind paints a picture of an army that frequently commits acts of cold-blooded and extreme violence. A number of interviewees revealed that the military will attempt to frame innocent bystanders as insurgents, often after panicked American troops have fired into groups of unarmed civilians. The veterans said the troops involved would round up any survivors and accuse them of being in the resistance while planting Kalashnikov AK47 rifles beside corpses to make it appear that they had died in combat. Anyone recognise echoes of what we now know went on in Vietnam here ?“It would always be an AK because they have so many of these lying around,” said Joe Hatcher, 26, a scout with the 4th Calvary Regiment. He revealed the army also planted 9mm handguns and shovels to make it look like the civilians were shot while digging a hole for a roadside bomb. “Every good cop carries a throwaway,” Hatcher said of weapons planted on innocent victims in incidents that occurred while he was stationed between Tikrit and Samarra, from February 2004 to March 2005. Any survivors were sent to jail for interrogation.

Civilians also died because of the reckless behaviour of military convoys. Sgt Kelly Dougherty of the Colorado National Guard described a hit-and-run in which a military convoy ran over a 10-year-old boy and his three donkeys, killing them all. “Judging by the skid marks, they hardly even slowed down. But, I mean… your order is that you never stop.”The worst abuses seem to have been during raids on private homes when soldiers were hunting insurgents. Thousands of such raids have taken place, usually at dead of night. The veterans point out that most are futile and serve only to terrify the civilians, while generating sympathy for the resistance. Sgt John Bruhns, 29, of the 3rd Brigade, 1st Armoured Division, described a typical raid. “You want to catch them off guard,” he explained. “You want to catch them in their sleep … You grab the man of the house. You rip him out of bed in front of his wife. You put him up against the wall… Then you go into a room and you tear the room to shreds. You’ll ask ‘Do you have any weapons? Do you have any anti-US propaganda?’ “Normally they’ll say no, because that’s normally the truth,” Sgt Bruhns said. “So you’ll take his sofa cushions and dump them. You’ll open up his closet and you’ll throw all the clothes on the floor and basically leave his house looking like a hurricane just hit it.” And at the end, if the soldiers don’t find anything, they depart with a “Sorry to disturb you. Have a nice evening”. Sgt Dougherty described her squad leader shooting an Iraqi civilian in the back in 2003. “The mentality of my squad leader was like, ‘Oh, we have to kill them over here so I don’t have to kill them back in Colorado’,” she said. “He just seemed to view every Iraqi as a potential terrorist.” “People would make jokes about it, even before we’d go into a raid, like, ‘Oh fuck, we’re gonna get the wrong house’. Cause it would always happen. We always got the wrong house.

“More quotes“ Cover your own butt was the first rule of engagement. Someone could look at me the wrong way and I could claim my safety was in threat….”Lieutenant Brady Van Engelen, 26, of Washington DC, 1st Armoured Division. Eight-month tour of Baghdad beginning Sept 2003

“I guess while I was there, the general attitude was, ‘A dead Iraqi is just another dead Iraqi… You know, so what?’… [Only when we got home] in… meeting other veterans, it seems like the guilt really takes place, takes root, then.” ….Specialist Jeff Englehart, 26, of Grand Junction, Colorado, 3rd Brigade, 1st Infantry. In Baquba for a year beginning February 2004

“[The photo] was very graphic… They open the body bags of these prisoners that were shot in the head and [one soldier has] got a spoon. He’s reaching in to scoop out some of his brain, looking at the camera and smiling.”Specialist Aidan Delgado, 25, of Sarasota, Florida, 320th Military Police Company. Deployed to Talil air base for one year beginning April 2003

“The car was approaching what was in my opinion a very poorly marked checkpoint… and probably didn’t even see the soldiers… The guys got spooked and decided it was a possible threat, so they shot up the car. And they [the bodies] literally sat in the car for the next three days while we drove by them….Sergeant Dustin Flatt, 33, of Denver, 18th Infantry Brigade, 1st Infantry Division. One-year from February 2004

“The frustration that resulted from our inability to get back at those who were attacking us led to tactics that seemed designed simply to punish the local population”… Sergeant Camilo Mejía, 31, from Miami, National Guardsman, 1-124 Infantry Battalion, 53rd Infantry Brigade. Six-month tour beginning April 2003

“I just remember thinking, ‘I just brought terror to someone under the American flag’.” …. Sergeant Timothy John Westphal, 31, of Denver, 18th Infantry Brigade, 1st Infantry Division. In Tikrit on year-long tour beginning February 2004

“A lot of guys really supported that whole concept that if they don’t speak English and they have darker skin, they’re not as human as us, so we can do what we want.”…. Specialist Josh Middleton, 23, of New York City, 2nd Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division. Four-month tour in Baghdad and Mosul beginning December 2004

“I felt like there was this enormous reduction in my compassion for people. The only thing that wound up mattering is myself and the guys that I was with, and everybody else be damned.”…..Sergeant Ben Flanders, 28, National Guardsman from Concord, New Hampshire, 172nd Mountain Infantry. In Balad for 11 months beginning March 2004

The Other War: Iraq Vets Bear Witness, by Chris Hedges and Laila al-Arian, appears in the 30 July issue of The Nation.

Read it if you want the truth instead of propogandaTags:Abu Ghraib army Democrats George W Bush insurgency Iraq military Political Rants politicians politics republican Republicans terrorism US militaryAbu Ghraib, army, Democrats, George W Bush, insurgency, Iraq, military, Political Rants, politicians, politics, republican, Republicans, terrorism, US military

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!