Prev | List | Random | Next
...to go vote for design #4. (That vote is needed, by the way - he's just a few votes shy of winning a very close contest.)
Update: Another endorsement.
You probably haven't heard much about the efforts of the Global Islamic Media Front - al Qaeda's "public relations" team. The group is well known to those who monitor terrorist web sites, but rarely reported on by the mainstream media. (Although the group's recent release of a video game in which the player's goal is to kill President Bush did get some coverage in the Washington Post.)
But another recent effort from the group won't likely be reported anywhere in the western media - at least not directly. Titled "Working Paper for a Media Invasion of America", the recently translated document was originally posted on a known jihaddist web site, but has received scant public attention from it's target audience. No full translations of the treatise are currently available, but a brief description of some of the content can be seen here.
Najd al-Rawi, the document's author, begins by noting that although they've been successful in many ways, the jihaddists haven't fully exploited the opportunities presented by the US media.
As an example of the sort of video material the group should provide, the author suggests "Video of attacks on US foot patrols with the caption 'Operation against the sons of the US people whom Bush cast into the fire of war against the Muslims'."
And in that we see both the political savvy and naiveté of the Global Islamic Media Front. They recognize the advantage - and relative ease - of turning as many Americans against their President as they can (dividing the enemy into opposing camps to be eliminated in turn being a primary goal of effective propaganda) but fail to grasp the idea that this requires no effort on their part whatsoever. Still - you can't blame them for being willing to accelerate the process, or contribute to the cause.
Here’s McCain’s full quote, in context, from back in January:
Questioner: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for fifty years…
McCain: Maybe a hundred. Make it one hundred. We’ve been in South Korea, we’ve been in Japan for sixty years. We’ve been in South Korea for fifty years or so. That’d be fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. Then it’s fine with me. I would hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day.
John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years. He’s said it, and it’s on tape.
But his campaign hates that he was caught. They’ve viciously attacked anyone who reminded the American people that he said it, including me. They’ve said that those who reference the 100 years comments are “deliberately misleading voters.”
So we’ve taken John McCain’s own words — video of him saying that 100 years would be “fine with me” — and made a TV ad. There’s no confusion, no distortion, no misleading — it’s John McCain, on tape, for voters to judge on their own.
It’s one of the most powerful political ads I’ve ever seen. It’s devastating — and the McCain campaign will spend the rest of the election trying to fight it.
New DNC ad:
Yes, those are American GIs. They survived.
About the only thing you can credit the DNC for is finally finding an actual image of American soldiers they could use.
Instead of Canadians:
(Their pals at moveon once used Brits.)
Those examples are sad and pathetic, and laughable. This latest is something else entirely. (But you can bet it was market tested thoroughly before they aired it.)
Update: In reviewing the ORIGINAL source video, I'm not even sure the soldiers were "attacked" - based on their "post-boom" actions that's really not clear. Moving to cover with weapons ready would be a more obvious response, but even from the longer clip I'm uncertain. That might be a controlled det - found enemy device intentionally detonated. There's no arguing that they either didn't expect the explosion right then or if they did they underestimated the size. Again, these guys don't appear to be responding to an immediate threat - but I don't know with complete certainty. The DNC certainly wants the viewer to believe they were attacked - perhaps even killed. So you can definitely credit the DNC with skillfull editing, in addition to finally finding US soldiers to use in an ad.
The odds of actually capturing an attack on video are fairly slim. Unless you're a reporter engaged in an actual combat op you're just not going to have a camera rolling at the opportune moment. Even Mike Yon doesn't have many such examples, and he's spent more time with troops than anyone. (Even with the Farah photo he didn't get the shot of the attack itself.) Unless you're embedded with the guys planting explosive devices (or detonating found ones) you're just not going to get a good video of the explosion.
And another update: Heh - After watching the DNC version again I noticed they substituted a much louder, deeper explosion sound than the actual bang in the real video. Not enough bang for their bucks, I suppose. So credit them with having good sound guys, too. (Unless that was Michael Moore who actually doctored the footage.)
And moore: Michael Moore's version has a fake boom in it too. Can't tell if the DNC used that or created their own.
Still Moore: So after swapping a couple emails with Ace, he and I agreed to split up the Fahrenheit 9/11 videos available on youtube and find the actual use of the clip therein. He found it in part 9 (he had the odds, I had the evens.) It's about 35 seconds into the clip. My take: Moore's version might use the original sound of the explosion, but if so he's cranked the base to produce a much more powerful sound than the original. The DNC version is different than Moore's or the actual footage, a more drawn out explosion.
Another note on Moore's clip: he edits the footage so you never see that the second guy (the one who was holding both weapons) is okay. He had run off camera (unseen in the immediate aftermath of the blast), and in the original his partner walks slowly over to his location and the clip ends with both of them standing, apparently not significantly wounded or concerned about any additional threat. In Moore's edit, the clip ends before he is revealed. The result in Fahrenheit 9/11 is two guys, boom, smoke, one guy left.
Thought you'd be interested in a design I'd submitted to a contest at www.wooden-nickel.com. Voting runs through tomorrow if you'd like to vote. Voting has been close, but another worthy coin seems to surge ahead each night.
The design was based on the song "On Leaving" that I learned of through your site some time ago. I also use the signature line below on a forum I belong to - The Military Association of GeoCachers (www.militarycache.org).
Below is the e-mail I sent out to my friends and family.
- God bless those that go fight the dragons so others can pretend they don't exist.
Greetings,Greyhawk says: What are you waiting for? Go vote! (You don't even have to register!)
Since I don't forward any of the jokes, inspirational stories, urban legends or other stuff that I'm always asked to "forward to everyone you know", I hope you'll excuse this brief interuption in your e-mail.
In case I didn't include you on my first e-mail, no, I'm not running for office. I have, however, entered a design contest at www.wooden-nickel.com. If you've already voted for me once or more, thanks!
My design (see attachment) was selected as one of the five finalists to be voted on by the public. If I win I get 100 wooden nickels free, which I primarily use to as 'swag' to leave in geocaches I found
If you feel so inclined, I hope you'll consider voting for my design (#4) by going to http://www.wooden-nickel.com/contest/ and simply selecting a check box. You can even vote once per day per network you use. For instance, once from home and once from work (per company policy) or other location. So you can actually vote early AND often (through April 30th). If you see the vote breakdown instead of the checkboxes, it means you or someone else on your network has already voted that day. The counter is reset about 9 AM Eastern each day.
My design (#4) has been in the lead except for a brief period during the last 24 hours, but my margin has been shrinking. I'm basically in competition with one other design. Between us, we've had about 65-70% of the vote since shortly after it began.
This company also has an ongoing deal where they will send you 4 free Support Our Troops nickels. Details are at http://www.wooden-nickel.com/freedom/.
If you would like to read the soldier's letter to his family that was the the inspiration for the wording, you can go to http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/002958.html. To listen to and excerpt of the song inspired by the letter, go to http://cdbaby.com/mp3lofi/3dbdown2-10.m3u.
A look back at media coverage of the British capture of Basra in the spring of 2003. This post is not intended to be all-inclusive. Additional expansion will occur as time permits.
The day before the invasion, the British role was explained in general terms:
The British army is "much better equipped, much more capable and integrated" into the American war plans than in the 1991 Gulf war, says General Sir Roger Wheeler, former head of the army. In a symbolic move not seen since the sec ond world war, up to 2,000 US marines are expected to be commanded by the British in a joint operation to take the key southern Iraqi city of Basra.At that point in time, few would risk stating anything for the record other than the obvious regarding the pending assault:
Under plans being drawn up at the US central command in Qatar, the US 15th marine expeditionary unit will join about 4,000 Royal Marine commandos in an amphibious assault to seize Iraq's only port and protect nearby oil wells.
"If we deploy in Iraq there will be lot of dead bodies, we can be absolutely sure of that," Lieutenant-Colonel Hugh Blackman, commander of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, told the Sunday Telegraph.In the earliest days of the combat, as American troops streamed northwards rowards Baghdad, British troops began securing the sourthern tip of the country.
The more cautious among military analysts emphasise the risks and uncertainties. They point to the old adage that the best laid military plans do not survive the first contact with the enemy.
Thousands of Royal Marine commandos and paratroopers supported by heavy armour were last night pushing towards Basra, Iraq's only port and the first key prize for the Anglo-American invaders.In addition to a potential humanitarian crisis, destruction of oil wells in the region was a concern to coalition forces, but...
Basra's strategic position has meant it has been fought over since its foundation 1,400 years ago. The British took it from the Turks in 1914 and again, in the face of an Arab revolt, in 1941. British forces this morning were on the verge of occupying it again after seizing the town of Umm Qasr, just south of the city.
Under plans drawn up by US commanders, and agreed by their UK counterparts, British forces were given the task of seizing Basra and protecting the Rumeila oil field west of the city and just north of the Kuwaiti border. The field has more than 5bn barrels in reserves.
President Saddam has made little apparent attempt to hold on to Basra, leaving only two regular army divisions rather than any of the better-equipped and better-trained republican guard divisions.
The city, which is predominantly Shia Muslim, is expected to fall relatively easily. The population has little love of Saddam and rose up against him and his Ba'ath party officials in the failed 1991 rising.
Basra suffered badly in 1991. While Saddam rebuilt Baghdad, much of the destruction in Basra has remained and many of the population remain psychologically scarred.
The assault on Basra heralds the make-up of the military administration under which Iraq will be run. British officers will control a vast southern sector of the country, centred on Basra. Commanders have drawn up extensive plans for humanitarian operations once the military occupation is secure. Food and water distribution points will be set up in the biggest military aid operation since the second world war.
The British want the capture of Basra to act as a model for the rest of the campaign. Part of their task will also be to ensure the fractious Shia south of the country does not erupt into civil war. Officers say they were given the role because of their experience of policing in Northern Ireland.
Once Basra is controlled the troops will fan out to seize smaller towns and villages and tackle resistance forces. Their control over the south will be crucial in giving the US the chance to close in on Baghdad.
As clouds of thick black smoke billowed across the main oilfield area behind Basra, Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, revealed that the Iraqi forces had set alight only seven wells, much fewer than the 30 estimated by the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, earlier in the day.Early reports from journalists accompanying British troops gave reason for optimism:
US and British officials remain confident that Saddam Hussein's army will be prevented from repeating the environmental disaster they caused when they blew up more than 700 wells during the first Gulf war.
Children run cheering as troops roll inBut reports from al Jazeera in Basra also focused on children:
It was a surreal way to invade a country. As a huge British convoy crossed into Iraq yesterday hundreds of children came to greet them. In the end British soldiers were greeted, not with gunfire, but with laughter and smiles.
As the troops moved past small boys ran up to the windows, smiling and grinning. 'Hello, hello,' one shouted. A small group of teenagers sang and danced and clapped their hands. Every single one of them seemed to wave his fingers in the universal signal for a cigarette.
Al-Jazeera's footage included an Iraqi child with the back of its head apparently blown off and wounded people covered in blood being treated on the floor of a hospital.Some western commenters were quick to condemn the distorted view of the war presented by those who would ignore the Iraqi Ministry of Information's reports
It apologised for showing disturbing pictures but said: "The world should know the truth and what is going on."
The Iraqi information minister, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, claimed that 77 civilians had been killed and 366 wounded in Basra, mainly by cluster bombs.
Most wars start by accident or with a flourish of misplaced jingoism. But this war is unique. It is hard to recall any conflict in history that aroused so much opposition even before it began. At best its legitimacy and purpose is in serious doubt. At worst, millions regard it as illegal and/or immoral.And as the war neared the 5-day point, media declarations of coalition failure became common:
Besides that, it is led by a president for whom few outside the United States have any respect.
Iraqi spokesmen, on the other hand, have been remarkably forthcoming and, if we disregard the usual rhetoric, the factual content of their statements has often been more accurate than that of the invasion forces. Their figures for Iraqi casualties have also been low enough to sound plausible.
General Franks, of course, is at pains to point out that modern American missiles are extremely accurate and that every target is carefully selected to minimise civilian casualties. This may be, but it takes only a few exceptions to persuade people otherwise - as happened at the weekend when al-Jazeera television showed millions of Arab viewers the picture of a child with a shattered head.
When they [coalition forces] arrived in Safwan last Friday, one Iraqi greeted them by saying: "What took you so long? God help you to become victorious."
Possibly he meant it, though it's not hard to imagine similar words being addressed to anyone who arrived in town with a conspicuous display of weaponry. Two Reuters correspondents, travelling independently of the military, told a different story:
"One group of Iraqi boys on the side of the road smiled and waved as a convoy of British tanks and trucks rolled by. But once it had passed, leaving a trail of dust and grit in its wake, their smiles turned to scowls. 'We don't want them here,' said 17-year-old Fouad, looking angrily up at the plumes of grey smoke rising from Basra. 'Saddam is our leader,' he said defiantly. 'Saddam is good'."
US and British troops were locked in fierce gunfights with Republican Guard soldiers yesterday as they struggled to take control of Umm Qasr, a small strategically important port on the Kuwaiti border.And with the port still under Iraqi control, reports of the deepening humanitarian crisis began appearing:
The port will be used to bring in food and logistics supplies once fighting is over.
Although US generals insisted the war was going to plan and that troops were advancing faster than expected, there was not the mass surrender that military planners had hoped for.
In many cases coalition troops have met unexpectedly strong resistance. As well as the fight at Umm Qasr, US troops talked of facing resistance at Basra, further north at Nassiriya and at the Shia religious town of Najaf, 100 miles south of Baghdad.
Iraqi city suffers water shortage...along with accounts of the courage and fortitude of Saddam's elite defenders:
The Red Cross today warned of an imminent humanitarian disaster in Iraq's second city of Basra, as the aid agency struggled to restore water supplies destroyed in the war.
Most of the city has been without water and electricity since Friday, which has been threatening hospitals and sanitation services in the area, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
The Republican Guard: outgunned and outnumbered, but they never surrenderIn the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof assured readers that coalition forces had failed to plan for enemy gunfire in response to the invasion:
As US and British troops meet with fierce resistance, an expert on the Iraqi army profiles Saddam Hussein's elite security forces and warns they have the potential to be formidable opponents
On the other hand, the guard demonstrated impressive tenacity and no unit withdrew without authorisation, in contrast to the regular army units, many of whose tank crews deserted. The tactical shortfalls of the guard officers are substantial, but tenacity can go some way to make up for lack of professionalism, especially when Iraqi soldiers are using civilians as a shield. This is already constraining British and US forces in Nassiriya, Umm Qasr and Basra.
...the war plan assumed that Iraqis would welcome us as liberators, even though every visitor to Iraq heard ordinary people warning that they would pull out their guns and take pot-shots at any invading Americans. The upshot of the ideological optimism was that we adopted not the full Powell doctrine of overwhelming force, but a blend with the Rumsfeld theory of smaller, more mobile and flexible forces. The optimists didn't factor in guerrilla resistance in rear areas; indeed, they blithely expected a lovefest in Basra."Then, as the first week of the war finally drew to a close,
A British soldier who was shot as he tried to calm rioting civilians in southern Iraq died yesterday, the first British combat death since the war began, the Ministry of Defence said.
The soldier, whose name was not released, was shot on Sunday evening near Az Zubayr and died from his wounds.
The second week of fighting would commence with some hopeful news, as the British launched a media blitz to turn the tide of negative reporting:
British forces support Basra 'uprising'More
News of a battlefield victory and a 'popular uprising' yesterday came just at the right time for prime-time news bulletins in the US and Britain, writes Brian Whitaker
After a series of setbacks, and with the advance on Baghdad delayed by sandstorms, the invasion forces were badly in need of some positive developments yesterday.
The first success of the day - which came just at the right moment for prime-time television news in the UK - was a claim by the British military that a "popular uprising" against Saddam Hussein's regime had broken out in Basra.
British forces then weighed in with artillery support for the rebelling Shia population and a 2,000-lb bomb was dropped on the Ba'ath party headquarters, according to reports. The British deputy commander, Major-General Peter Wall, hailed the uprising as "just the sort of encouraging indication we have been looking for".
At present, very little news is coming out of Basra from independent sources, so it is difficult to be sure what is really happening. Some British versions have been much more cautious, describing the uprising as "nascent", while al-Jazeera's reporter inside the city said there was no sign of any uprising at all.
As British heavy artillery pounded the outskirts of Basra, reports began to emerge of what was described as a "nascent" uprising.While the British made no apparent acceleration towards Basra in response, as the month of March concluded (with American forces on the outskirts of Baghdad and the British still "approaching" Basra) British media sources were eager to point out the superiority of British apples to American oranges:
Black Watch troops on the Shatt al-Arab waterway said they had seen Iraqi artillery firing at their own people. Large crowds were said to be gathering on the streets.
A British officer quoted in pooled reports said: "We have seen a large crowd on the streets. The Iraqis are firing their own artillery at their own people. There will be carnage."
Pressure to intervene increased when the Iraqi forces were seen directing horizontal artillery fire at the crowd.
Al Lockwood, a British military spokesman in Qatar, said there had been an "uprising" in Basra against the Ba'ath party. He said that according to reports: "The Shia population attempted to attack the ruling party. The ruling party responded by firing mortars."
It is not known how many casualties were caused by the artillery fire, which British forces described as "horrific".
Cracks are appearing between British and American commanders which have serious implications for their future operations in Iraq.Meanwhile, behind the British line of advance
Senior British military officers on the ground are making it clear they are dismayed by the failure of US troops to try to fight the battle for hearts and minds.
They also made plain they are appalled by reports over the weekend that US marines killed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, as they seized bridges outside Nassiriya in southern Iraq.
"You can see why the Iraqis are not welcoming us with open arms," a senior defence source said yesterday.
Yesterday, British officers described the very different approach between UK and American soldiers by pointing to Uum Qasr, the Iraqi port south of Basra and the first urban area captured by US and UK marines. "Unlike the Americans, we took our helmets and sunglasses off and looked at the Iraqis eye to eye," said a British officer.
While British soldiers "get out on their feet", Americans, he said, were reluctant to leave their armoured vehicles. When they did do so - and this was the experience even in Uum Qasr - US marines were ordered to wear their full combat kit.
One difference emphasised yesterday by senior British military sources was the attitude towards "force protection". A defence source added: "The Americans put on more and more armour and firepower. The British go light and go on the ground." He made it plain what approach should be adopted towards what he called "frightened Iraqis".
The British military put the difference in approach down to decades of training as well as experience - first in colonial insurgencies in Malaysia, then in Northern Ireland and peacekeeping operations in the Balkans.
General Richard Myers, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, went out of his way over the weekend to say his troops were learning from the British.
After agreeing with General William Wallace, commander of US ground forces in Iraq, that the enemy was responding in a way that the allies had not "wargamed" for, he said American - as well as British - forces could afford to be patient.
US marines in Nassiriya have said they had asked British troops for instructions in how to conduct urban warfare.
British military sources are now concerned that the experience in peacekeeping and unconventional warfare of British troops will mean they will be in Iraq long after the Americans have left, even for years, in policing and humanitarian operations.
Shortly after George Bush was elected president, the former chief of defence staff, Lord Guthrie, told the Guardian that the new administration was moving towards light, flexible forces which can "get there quicker but not stay around for ever". He added: "The Americans talk about the warrior ethic and ... that peacekeeping is for wimps."
Iraq has shown that the quick-light-flexible force strategy has not worked. The concern here among military chiefs is that the experience will mean the US will want to get out of places even quicker, leaving the British and others to continue fighting the battle for hearts and minds.
Iraqi police chiefs routinely tortured civilians who could not afford to pay extortionate bribes, locals in Abu al-Kacib said yesterday.As American forces took the Baghdad airport, British media commenters again contrasted the American failure and the British success:
The police station in the strategic Basra suburb - taken by the Royal Marines four days ago - was regularly used for torture and interrogation, informers said.
During a routine search of the building on Tuesday, soldiers from 40 Commando discovered filthy prison cells with equipment inside including electric cables, rubber tyres, hosepipes and meat hooks.
The building was also used by Saddam Hussein's internal security service, the mukhabarat, to interrogate political prisoners and innocents rounded up en masse after plots against the regime were discovered, another informer said.
One businessman who did not want to be named told British troops that police had set tariffs for locals suspected of crimes. If they could not afford the bribes they would be taken to the two-storey fortified police station and beaten. Some had never been seen again.
The businessman, aged around 55, said: "If you killed someone you could still get out of the prison if you paid the right money."
Common sense demands that what is being called the "final push" on Baghdad should not be rushed, whatever the political pressures in Washington. If nothing else, the past two weeks have shown that hopes of quick, easy triumphs were misplaced. The Rumsfeld plan did not work; the lightning strike fizzled. The welcoming crowds did not materialise; awesome air power was not decisive. Iraqi armies did not surrender en masse; instead, far more than expected stood and fought. Mr Bush and the Pentagon no doubt badly want to finish it before anything else goes wrong. But Downing Street's newly cautious, circumspect approach, like that of the British army around Basra, is more sensible.And as British forces tentavely approached the outskirts of Basra, their more cautious approach was detailed here:
It would be irresponsible to assume that Baghdad will implode now that US troops are at its gates. This war has al ready proved a graveyard of false assumptions and premature claims - such as the Basra uprising. Realism is what is required now. And the reality is that Baghdad is where the regime has always said it would make its stand.
'Raid and aid' tactic by British forces
British troops on the outskirts of Basra were yesterday distributing leaflets in an attempt to reassure local people that their intentions were benign.
"This time we won't abandon you," the sheets said, in a reference to 1991 when the Shias were encouraged by the US and Britain to rise up against Saddam Hussein only to be let down as their revolt was brutally quashed.
The reverse of the leaflet, written in Arabic, reads: "People of Basra, we are here to liberate the people of Iraq. Our enemy is the regime and not the people. We need your help to identify the enemy to rebuild Iraq. English speakers please come forward. We will stay as long as it takes."
British special forces, Royal Marine commandos, troops from 7 Armoured Brigade - the Desert Rats - and gunners from the Royal Horse Artillery have been engaged in "raid and aid" tactics, attacking hostile forces while trying to make friends with civilians. The problem comes when they are mingled or when troops cannot tell one from another.
For more than a week, British troops have tried to secure Basra, Iraq's second largest city, whose capture, it had been hoped, would deal a blow to President Saddam's regime and encourage Iraqi commanders elsewhere in the country, including Baghdad, to give up.
The 25,000 or so British troops and marines in southern Iraq have secured the deep water port of Umm Qasr, an important base for the supplies of humanitarian aid. They have also secured the oilfields of Rumaila to the west, and the Faw peninsula to the south-east, according to military sources.
The British tactic is not to surround Basra, but to allow the estimated 1,000 Fedayeen and other Iraqi special forces in the city of 1.5 million people an escape route to the east.
Meanwhile, hundreds of civilians continued to stream out of the city. However, the exodus appeared to have slowed from previous days and, according to a British military spokesman, civilians were reporting increasingly brutal measures by Iraqi government forces to stop people fleeing, including one case of a woman being publicly hanged.
They said Saddam loyalists were forcing Iraqi troops to fight using death threats, shooting people if they tried to flee, using children as young as five as human shields, and hiding armed fighters in schools.
Iraqis responded with rocket-propelled grenades and machine gun fire. But within minutes the Desert Rats had destroyed an Iraqi T-55 tank and reduced a bunker to rubble.And as American troops launched the "Thunder Run" into Baghdad...
Some of the Iraqi troops were caught off guard: one Fedayeen was found asleep and killed as he tried to flee with a rocket-propelled grenade.
Twelve Iraqis were captured in an industrial estate where militiamen had been leading the fierce resistance.
Amid the destruction and scattered ammunition lay the dismembered bodies of two Iraqi militiamen in civilian dress, one still clutching a rocket.
The war in Iraq entered a new phase on Sunday when British tanks rolled into the centre of Basra.And finally...
A fortnight after surrounding it, and following a series of preliminary attacks, soldiers from the 7th Armoured Brigade - the Desert Rats - pushed through "patchy resistance" to the heart of Iraq's second city, according to a source at central command in Qatar. Reports say that the army has reached the old city and is occupying the ruling Ba'ath party's headquarters.
Forces loyal to Saddam Hussein appeared last night to have lost control of much of Basra, after columns of British troops poured into Iraq's second city, destroying its Ba'ath party headquarters.British troops were flush with victory:
After nearly three weeks on the outskirts, three squadrons of Challenger 2 tanks from the Royal Scots Dragoons ploughed into the city, followed by a second wave of Royal Marine Commandos. By midday they had driven from the south-west through a heavily damaged industrial area, encountering only "isolated pockets" of resistance. Three British soldiers were killed.
British chief-of-staff Major General Peter Wall told Reuters at the Qatar military headquarters that Iraqi army forces in Basra had "departed". But he warned that Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party loyalists and Fedayeen militia were still a threat. "It's been a very good day but I caution against excessive optimism," he said. "A relatively small number of determined people in a large city can give us difficulty."
Civilians fleeing from Basra in lorries and taxis - many waving white flags as they passed the British columns - described seeing two burned- out Iraqi tanks on the road.
Among those fleeing appeared to be two Iraqi military vehicles under white flags. For the first time, many of those leaving seemed to be celebrating the British advance by waving and honking horns, in an area that had seen repeated assaults on US and British soldiers and western journalists.
Finally, British troops begin to feel like an army of liberationAnd, as would happen a few hours later in Baghdad, Iraqi celebrations began in earnest:
The British soldiers pulled down the picture of Saddam Hussein from the memorial building in the centre of town and the locals trampled all over it. As 16 Air Assault Brigade rolled into the strategic town of Ad Dayr, west of Basra in southern Iraq, they stood by the side of the road with their thumbs up and grins on their faces.
The sheikhs of Ad Dayr had come to the outlying village of Qaryat Nas to greet Brigadier Jacko Page in their best clothes, their grubby galabayyas covered with black robes trimmed with gold, their headresses immaculate. They patted the small, bespectacled commander on the back, shouting "salaam, salaam".
One man, a student, said life with Saddam Hussein for this town of farmers "was like life with nothing". He explained: "Most people here don't have anything, only suffering and pain."
Another told the soldiers: "We have been waiting a long time for you. We are afraid you will leave us again like you did in 1991. If you are going to leave, you have to tell us now because if we say something wrong about Saddam and the Ba'ath party they will come back and kill us."
But they were given assurances and as confidence grew, the pictures of Saddam were torn down. Outside, in another village, Corporal Mick Flynn had found his armoured vehicle mobbed. Asked over the radio if he needed assistance, he laughed: "We are with the kind of lord mayor of this village. He says he welcomes us and the Americans and he says he wants the head of the British army to come and speak to him." For the time being, he would have to make do with Corporal Flynn.
Celebrating freedom in a spree of looting
The big guns over Basra have at last fallen silent. For almost three weeks now every night has been punctuated by the deafening crack of British shells over the city. But on Sunday night not a single volley was fired.
Yesterday the people of Basra woke up and discovered why. Saddam Hussein's rule is over in the city. The British have finally come.
But if the big guns are quiet, the small ones are not. The battle for Basra may be won, but chaos was the main victor as thousands of people tasted sudden freedom. The rattle of gunfire echoed through the city's streets as looters ransacked official buildings and helped themselves to whatever they could find. British soldiers, still battling a few diehard militia, could do little but watch.
"Looting is bad, but I am going to get some. We have had nothing for so long that now we have to take what we can," he said.
Suddenly the crack of incoming machine gun fire tore through the air. As journalists and British troops ducked for cover and scrambled behind cars, William remained calm. He looked briefly around him and then crouched down on the pavement. He put his fingers in his ears through the gunfire around him and continued the interview.
"Don't worry. It is just militiamen and you British will soon kill them all," he said with a large grin.
William was nothing if not phlegmatic under fire. That is no surprise. He was conscripted into the Iraqi army as a sergeant. He has seen his fair share of violence. But he deserted two months ago after hearing President George Bush speak on the radio.
"I knew there was going to be a war when I heard him and I knew who was going to win. I just left," he said and flashed his grin again.
William is now a happy man. Along with thousands of others he waved and gave the thumbs-up sign to every British tank and armoured vehicle that trundled by. It was not the singing and dancing in the streets dreamed of by Whitehall spin doctors, but it was a heartening thing for the British to see.
People were happy that it was over. You could tell it in the smiling face of a young boy, almost bent double as he hauled a refrigerator down the road in the direction of a waiting donkey cart.
But William did not want the world to misunderstand the looting. The people of southern Iraq have suffered much over the past 20 years. This was their time to get some of their own back.
"Please do not judge us," he said, for a moment serious. "The people here have had nothing so long. Do not condemn us for this. Do not misunderstand what we mean by this."
Another rattle of machine gun fire cut the air and William became concerned that it might be British troops firing over people's heads to ward off the looting thousands. He needed his share before the situation changed. He was off, dragging his cart behind him with a gaggle of friends trailing in his wake. "I am very happy," he said as a parting shot. "I wish we could fight alongside the British and Americans. Saddam Hussein is vanished. He was our nightmare and he is gone."
Saddam Hussein is indeed gone from Basra. But the city is far from safe. In the grounds of a building next door to the college, the corpse of a militiaman lay face down in the dust. It was impossible to say if he had been shot by British troops or as revenge by local people. Certainly, military intelligence reports have suggested that reprisals against those linked to the former regime have already begun.
The following month:
The teenager was allegedly arrested by British soldiers who beat him in May 2003. They then allegedly ordered him to swim across the Zubair river, but his injuries from the assault were too severe and he drowned.And in June
Six British military police officers have been killed and eight other servicemen wounded in two separate incidents in south-eastern Iraq.The battle for Basra had begun.
Both incidents happened at the edge of the British area of operations within the country, in the region of the town of Amara.
They mark the heaviest losses to enemy action suffered in a single day by US-led coalition forces since the war in Iraq was declared largely over on 1 May, after the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime.
It is also the heaviest loss of British life in a single hostile incident since UK forces entered Iraq at the start of the war in late March.
By contrast, British troops operating in and around the second city of Basra had until now seen no serious post-war attacks, often dispensing with their helmets and flak jackets to present a less threatening sight to local people.
British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon said the bodies of the six Royal Military Police officers, who had been training Iraqi police officers, were discovered on Tuesday in the village of Majar al-Kabir, 25 kilometres (16 miles) south of Amara.
He told the House of Commons that the circumstances of their deaths were being investigated, but initial indications were that they were involved in an incident at the local police station.
Para patrol attacked
Mr Hoon said that a few hours earlier, two vehicles carrying troops from the 1st Battalion of the Parachute Regiment came under attack from a large number of Iraqi gunmen while on patrol in Majar al-Kabir.
The Iraqis were armed with heavy machine-guns, rocket-propelled grenades and rifles, he told MPs.
Please take a moment to read about Merlin's Miracles here.
Most readers here will recognize the Deuce-Four as the unit Mike Yon accompanied in Mosul in 2005. Here's a song written and recorded by members of that unit while deployed.
The creator of the video says "This is a song I wrote and recorded in Iraq with a fellow Infantry Soldier. Set to pictures of us and our Unit in Action in Iraq. A few of the pictures are property of Michael Yon."
There are several youtube videos from Iraq vets who set their photos to popular songs - and there are a few who write their own.
Less than a month ago this tribute to surrender was the best reporting the New York Times could get from Basra:
Firsthand Look at Basra Shows Value of White FlagThough only a few weeks have passed, now you can read first hand reports from Basra by Deborah Haynes in the London Times:
Calling on my experience as a captain in the Iraqi Army before the 2003 invasion and essentially a war correspondent since then, I headed to Basra to see if I could make my way into the city and see what was happening there.
Gun battles broke out unpredictably, so I ran or walked when it was quiet, then dropped down and sought cover when I could hear shooting. After 45 minutes or so, I came upon the Rumaila Hotel in a central neighborhood called Ashar. Amazingly, it was open, with six or seven guests inside and a couple of employees. I was so exhausted I didn't think twice, just checked in.
The next day I moved around as much as I could. The common observation was this: There was nowhere the Mahdi either did not control or could not strike at will.
On Saturday I was talking with a colleague on my cellphone when a gun battle started right outside the hotel. It was so loud I couldn't hear the voice on the other end of the line anymore. I dived into a corner of my room and waited for it to end.
A while after the shooting stopped, some other residents of the hotel and I went outside. The street was littered with the shells of heavy machine guns where the Mahdi Army had fired toward another hotel, the Meerbad, where Ministry of Interior officials were staying, perhaps 50 yards away. We could see their pickup trucks, now full of bullet holes, in the parking lot of the hotel.
I decided to leave Basra. I took the white flag with me.
Young women are daring to wear jeans, soldiers listen to pop music on their mobile phones and bands are performing at wedding parties again.Or you can just look at the pictures.
All across Iraq’s second city life is improving, a month after Iraqi troops began a surprise crackdown on the black-clad gangs who were allowed to flourish under the British military. The gunmen’s reign had enforced a strict set of religious codes.
Driving through Basra in a convoy with the Iraqi general leading the Charge of the Knights operation, The Times passed Iraqi security forces manning checkpoints and patrolling the roads. Not a hostile shot was fired as the convoy turned into what was until the weekend the most notorious neighbourhood in the city. Hayaniya, a teeming slum, was a bastion for al-Mahdi Army, the main militia.
For the first time in four years local residents have been emboldened to stand up to the militants and are turning in caches of weapons. Army checkpoints have been erected across Basra and traffic police are also out in force.
The security forces have also torn down many banners supporting al-Mahdi Army as well as portraits of its leader, Moqtada al-Sadr, though some still remain in militia strongholds.
Mike Yon's book is #3 at Barnes and Noble online - $13.96 probably doesn't hurt. (I'd act fast on that.)
And here's audio of Mike's appearance on Mark Levin's show.
And as far as I can tell, the Post is the only major mainstream news source in America to have published a review. I'm not sure whether that does or doesn't surprise me.
And thanks again, Mike.
Rep Paul Broun's anti-"porn" Bill has caught some notice in ye olde blogosphere. We discussed it yesterday at MilBlogs (starting with Badger6's post from Iraq), and I think we've beat it damn near to death. (Or at least until it's rather limp and fading fast.) Still, watching the blog discussions, I'm struck that many well-intentioned folks are missing the real issues here.
1. This isn't about "our boys in Iraq" - they've never had porn available in the BX/PX over there. (It's too late to be outraged about that now - you missed the boat in 1990.) Here in the 21st century their porn supplies are limited to whatever meager amounts they can bring into country on the 1 TB external hard drives they plug into the personal laptop computers they also bring over, boosted by whatever "trading" they do with their comrades or obtain downtown. (All of which is a violation of General Order One, and I have no personal knowledge of any of our troops actually doing this and I'm sure the Army has employed several thousand inspectors to vigorously scan those personal computers not on the network for secret hidden password protected folders containing things that might make Congressman Broun blush with shame especially if it's gay porn with hot girl-on-girl action.) It's about bases in the good ol' USA - none of which are in Congressman Broun's district.
2. It's not about banning Playboy - it's about banning Maxim, FHM (which currently are available in the combat zones), and a host of other sources (the Victoria's Secret catalog, for instance) of pictures of smutty, perverted, disgusting filth such as "any part of the female breast below a horizontal line across the top of the areola with less than an opaque covering" - among other things defined by this bill as "nudity". R-rated movies (and some PG-13) would be right out. (Please read this post in which we examine the Bill instead of the media coverage of the Bill prior to arguing this point.) But bare in mind that if passed, "our boys" (and girls) won't be unable to obtain said items, they'd simply be forced to walk across the street and buy their copies of "Showgirls" with John Q Public at Best Buy - or order them online (even in Iraq).
3. Because taxpayer funds are not involved directly in the AAFES acquisition and distribution of this material, Broun's spokesman explained that the indirect use of taxpayer funds - in that taxpayers provide the salaries of the soldiers that might purchase said items - validates a congressional ban.
So, ignore the outrage over whether or not our brave GIs will be able to get at least one of their hands on this material - I suspect they'll manage. (And by the way, even though it has 16 cosponsors, I suspect this Bill is going to die in committee). Instead ask yourself if you're comfortable with the precedents set in items 2 and 3 above.
And ponder the comments from SFC SKI. Read carefully, he might be talking to you.
It’s good to know that those 16 backers have taken care of all the other problems the military faces and are now taking care of this issue.
Nothing builds up my morale like some know-nothing busybody congressman checking up on conditions at military bases and being able to see the lack of adequate and affordable housing, reduction in base services like affordable childcare, or the various pawn shops, strip bars, and “E-Z credit know money down payday loan” places lining both sides of the entry to a military post, and can see it’s nudie mags in the PX that is the big threat facing “our boys and girls” in uniform. Oh for the day when 18 is considered adulthood, and not some waypoint on the prolonged childhood the nannystaters want it to be.
Top Sunni Bloc Is Set to Rejoin Cabinet in IraqThe AP:
BAGHDAD — Iraq’s largest Sunni bloc has agreed to return to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s cabinet after a boycott of nearly a year, several Sunni leaders said Thursday. They cited a recently passed amnesty law and the government’s crackdown on Shiite militias as reasons for the move.
Reconstruction of Samarra shrine unites factions in Iraq
SAMARRA, Iraq (AP) — It was the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine here that pushed Iraq to the brink of civil war, bloodshed that has left tens of thousands dead and this ancient city in ruins.
But reconstruction of the famed mosque amid the rubble filling this city is under way, once bitter Shiite and Sunni enemies jointly man checkpoints and locals hope tourists will return again to see the shrine and help save the economy.
"It's a beautiful thing that they are rebuilding the mosque," said Abdul Jabar Salah, an unemployed father of three standing in line on Tuesday outside the mayor's office, waiting to apply for a job helping with reconstruction of the shrine.
"We're hopeful that as the mosque rises, so, too, will our economic situation. All things, though, depend upon security," he said.
War based on lies!!! Civil war!!! No military solution!!!
Though it sold out earlier this week, Mike Yon's book was actually just "officially" released. I've warned people previously, order quickly. (Full review here - email it to your friends and congressmen.)
Update: $13.96 at Barnes and Noble (thanks Maggie!!). At that price you can get one for a friend. (Act fast, I'm not sure it will last...)
...I've been guest blogging at Jules Crittenden's.
(And I'm always "on" at MilBlogs.)
This is a good idea. You're just a few clicks away from sending my NY Post review of Mike Yon's book to your friends, neighbors, and congressional representatives. (They might even buy the book for themselves!)
Via email, Haider Ajina writes...
The following is my translation of an article in Alrafidain news April 17 2008.
Iraq’s Josef Alsadar said that Muqtada Alsadar has tainted our family reputation; we will deal with him internally.Haider adds,
Alseyed Josef Alsadar a member of the honored Sadar family wrote a letter to Alrafedain news which said: ‘Muqtada Alsadar has tainted the reputation of this respected family, and the family disowns Muqtada. We are as innocent of him as the wolf is of the blood of Josef (Biblical (Old Testament I believe) and Koranic reference). The family is working on ways to discipline him with in the family. Consultation for this are held at the highest level to come up with punishments for its rogue son.
These courageous and dangerous statements come, for the fist time, from a member of the Sadar family. Alseyed Josef Alsadar is considered to be a member of the family with deep faith who is rarely public. It appears he has broken his silence to show the truth before it is to late.
Alrafidain has published this news after it consulted with Josef Alsadar, and expressed its concern that publishing his letter may threaten his life or safety. The news agency reminded him of the assassination of Said Riadh Alnoori some days earlier. He was assassinated after he wrote Muqtada a letter asking him to dissolve the Mehdi Army. Alseyed Josef insisted we publish his letter against all threats.
A number of religious leaders and leading figures have stepped out of a long standing tradition of non confrontation of other religious leaders. This tradition is now being challenged. Muqtada was told by a number of Ayatollahs that it is against Islam to take arms against an elected government. The will of the people is to be respected and political change has to happen at the ballot box. This is very encouraging and really not a surprise. Islam teaches Muslims that it is their duty to speak out and take action to confront wrongdoings. It is time this teaching is put to practice by those who profess to be leaders of the religion. Muslim condemnations of terrorist attacks and bigotry have been heard for some time now. Suicide attacks have also been condemned by a number of Muslim leaders, now it is time to call those who entice violent political change to task.
Sadr Studies 101 - from The AP:
BAGHDAD — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mocked anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as a coward on Sunday, hours after the radical leader threatened to declare war unless U.S. and Iraqi forces end a military crackdown on his followers.But what do you suppose he's "studying"? Based on my experience with college age kids I'll bet he's actually playing Guitar Hero or World of Warcraft when he ought to be studying, but comments are open for your best guess.
Rice, in the Iraqi capital to tout security gains and what she calls an emerging political consensus, said al-Sadr is content to issue threats and edicts from the safety of Iran, where he is studying. Al-Sadr heads an unruly militia that was the main target of an Iraqi government assault in the oil-rich city of Basra last month, and his future role as a spoiler is an open question.
"I know he's sitting in Iran," Rice said dismissively, when asked about al-Sadr's latest threat to lift a self-imposed cease-fire with government and U.S. forces. "I guess it's all-out war for anybody but him," Rice said. "I guess that's the message; his followers can go too their deaths and he's in Iran."
In fairness, there's no quote from Secretary Rice using the word "coward" - so that first line might be editorial interpretation by the AP.
I find this quote from the above excerpt interesting: "Al-Sadr heads an unruly militia that was the main target of an Iraqi government assault in the oil-rich city of Basra last month" because from what I hear, Sadr is having a bad month this month, too, as this LA Times story makes clear:
Like Basra, with its oil, whoever controls Najaf will play a major role in charting Iraq's future. It is here Shiite politicians come for guidance from the grand ayatollahs. It is here the populist Sadr first challenged Iraq's conservative religious establishment.Of course, this is how the LA Times interprets that:
"Najaf is the kitchen, where major decisions are cooked," said Salah Obeidi, Sadr's official spokesman.
Obeidi works out of a barren room in a closed-down restaurant and hotel. Bodyguards sit in the lobby, decorated with a mural of Sadr and long-haired Shiite saints gazing austerely at Najaf's roads. Obeidi confesses he has been in crisis mode lately.
"We are afraid the situation from now till October won't be stable for the Sadrists," Obeidi said. "Najaf is very important."
This time, the grand ayatollahs have declined to aid the incendiary cleric.
Three days into the Basra campaign, Grand Ayatollah Najafi issued a fatwa, or religious opinion or edict, that declared the Iraqi government as the only force in the country with the right to bear arms.
His son, Sheik Ali Najafi, left little doubt that the clergy had backed the Iraqi army operations.
"We see this as a positive improvement. . . . The people want the government to control the streets and the law to be enforced. No other groups," he said, sitting in his study, furnished with cushions, a laptop and a clock bearing his father's portrait.
The poisonous atmosphere of treachery and paranoia has consequences far beyond the alleyways of this ancient shrine city.While over in Sadr City, "Iraqi and U.S. forces appeared to be penetrating deeper into the district, one local journalist said. There were no signs that Prime Minister Nouri Maliki was pulling back on his offensive..."
Najaf may hold the key to Iraq's stability; if it descends into violence, the entire Shiite south will almost certainly follow suit. U.S. forces will be stretched, the chances of a troop drawdown diminished. The Shiite parties involved will probably look to Iran to broker an end to the crisis. And chances for real political process will be on hold.
Meanwhile, farther south, where the AP said "Al-Sadr heads an unruly militia that was the main target of an Iraqi government assault in the oil-rich city of Basra last month", "Iraqi soldiers took control of the last bastions of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr’s militia in Basra on Saturday." Odd, that.
And last week:
Basra residents welcome Iraq army crackdownBack in the UK, the Telegraph celebrated the coalition victory:
BASRA, Iraq (AFP) — Three weeks after Iraqi troops swarmed into the southern city of Basra to take on armed militiamen who had overrun the streets, many residents say they feel safer and that their lives have improved.
The fierce fighting which marked the first week of Operation Sawlat al-Fursan (Charge of the Knights) has given way to slower, more focused house-by-house searches by Iraqi troops, which led on Monday to the freeing of an abducted British journalist.
Residents say the streets have been cleared of gunmen, markets have reopened, basic services have been resumed and a measure of normality has returned to the oil-rich city.
Battle to retake Basra was 'complete disaster'I'll bet they didn't even serve crumpets with the tea at their memorial service for the fallen.
The British-trained Iraqi Army's attempt to retake Basra from militiamen was an "unmitigated disaster at every level", British commanders have disclosed.
...takes many forms. Here's an Iraqi mom in Baghdad:
One learns a great deal about oneself during wartime. One thing I learned is that I cannot give up my home and accept life in exile.Maybe there's something to be gained by us staying, too.
When I contemplated moving my family out of Iraq, I asked myself, "What do I want to gain from leaving? Would I really be able to secure a future for myself and my family? Am I willing to leave for good?" If I left Iraq, I would have to give up my current position as a university professor and start from scratch. That's not easy, especially for an Iraqi exile.
Here, I own my own home and have established myself both at the university and within the journalism community.
And by staying, maybe I can teach the upcoming generation that there actually is hope of improving their lives in Iraq.
BAGHDAD — Iraqi soldiers took control of the last bastions of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr’s militia in Basra on Saturday, and Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad strongly endorsed the Iraqi government’s monthlong military operation against the fighters.Nice to see that in the New York Times. (Hat tips to Tigerhawk and Instapundit) And how kind of Iran's ambassador to "endorse" the effort - perhaps we couldn't have one without the other.
By Saturday evening, Basra was calm, but only after air and artillery strikes by American and British forces cleared the way for Iraqi troops to move into the Hayaniya district and other remaining Mahdi Army militia strongholds and begin house-to house searches, Iraqi officials said.
But on that "only after air and artillery strikes by American and British forces" bit - that's true. Just like American troops, our Iraqi allies benefit from topcover.
Long before he became Barack Obama's campaign
manager (correction: "co-chair" or "defense advisor", depending on your source) former USAF Chief of Staff General Merrill ("Tony") McPeak explained the concept in the Washington Post:
For all but the resolutely sightless, it is now obvious that air combat determines the outcome in modern war. In the early hours of March 20, the salvo aimed at [Saddam Hussein] himself was preceded by nearly a month of air attacks in and around Baghdad -- to say nothing of a decade or so of bombing in connection with enforcing the no-fly zones. <...> Because of this aerial preparation, Iraq's air defenses stayed mostly silent and our aircraft were able to begin reducing opposing ground forces immediately. Army and Marine Corps formations, judged by "experts" to be much too small for the job, captured Baghdad in just 22 days, and with comparatively light casualties. Not only did coalition air power systematically disorganize Iraq's ground forces, it did so at small cost.Now I give a lot more credit to the ground forces than General (ret.) McPeak might care to, but I do know that they appreciate the sound of jet noise overhead.
And for those who are eager to provide that capability to the Iraqi Air Force - well, let's not rush into that, okay?
They do have limited airlift capability, though, (I was there when they got their first C-130, by the way) and reports I've heard indicate that they did use their own assets to transport troops to Basra. Good on 'em.
Here's that review I mentioned yesterday.
For what it's worth, their original request was for 750 words, and that seems to be the approximate length of any and all book reviews there. My first draft was about 1200 words, I cut til it hurt to submit 750. (I also made arrangements with Mike to include three of his photos in the review - thanks again, Mike.) The Post editors then realized it was too short (in fairness, they wanted more direct quotes, not more "me"). I expanded it significantly and after the editors finished working their magic the published version is.... about 1200 words. All this had to be accomplished during a tdy, late at night after dinners following full day "conferencing".
Bottom line: Not sure how common this is, but as far as I can tell, Mike's book gets double the normal space at the NY Post.
The Iraqi Army lost some men, including a Brigadier, during the recent fighting around Basrah. Yesterday began a three day period where a memorial/rememberance would be held for a portion of the day. I was invited to attend, and was allowed, even encouraged, to photograph any part of the event.As he says over at MilBlogs, "I wish anyone who thinks the IA isn't serious, or gives a damn about this fight could have seen the look on the incoming 14th DIV CDR's face. I will not EVER forget it."
John's doing the toughest job over there, working with the Iraqi Army. They are the ones on whom ultimate success or failure depends. I don't think many Americans - even among those already serving - would take on his mission.
God bless ye, Johnny.
I spent the past week away, some may have noticed. Not just away from this site, but away from home; off somewhere else at a conference with full days and late dinners and a slooow (but wireless) internet connection in billeting. (Yes, slower than Baghdad.) Such is life.
But I spent some of my spare time this past week reading and rereading Mike Yon's book, and writing and rewriting a review thereof. Hopefully you'll see that in finished form somewhere soon. In the meantime, here's a brief bit that was excised somewhere along the way. The "graveyards" I mention are near Baqubah, the city in which Mike's book begins. I'm struck by the difference between Mike's Baqubah of a few months ago and the one described here.
"If you're not there now, you're not current" was a statement I heard regarding Iraq at the conference. In a room full of people who had been there, no argument was offered.
I'd guess Mike was still writing his book up until the day before it went to press a few weeks ago. It's current. I spoke with him earlier this week. "Congratulations on the book. I saw you made the top 50 at Amazon." I told him. My news was old news. "We were in the top ten before they sold out." Mike replied. That's certainly good news and bad news - but if you're a reader here and hadn't already ordered your copy then you have no one to blame but yourself. There are more on the way.
And there may be an upside to that shortfall - the Amazon price is quite low now, perhaps reflecting the brief delay you'll experience in getting a copy. A good time to order one for a friend or Congressman, says I.
You might still be able to get an autographed copy. But he's only in the States for a couple weeks, and then he's back to Iraq. I'd recommend ordering quickly.
What tales we'll tell, I wrote from Baghdad on Christmas, 2004) when that time comes when tales can be told. Coincidentally, that month Mike Yon was stepping off a plane there for the first time to do just that.
It was good to spend time this past week sitting around dinner tables, well fed and downing a few beers and swapping some of those tales with the handful of people in the world who'd done what I'd done in Iraq, at different times but often in the same places as far back as March 2003. Such opportunities are rare, for me perhaps never to be repeated. But between us all we could compile a comprehensive first hand account. Perhaps some day I will.
And it was good to see old friends, folks I'd known from as long ago and far away as Korea in 1989. Guys I'd been to schools with who now actually looked like the fathers of those guys I'd been to school with. I'm kidding, of course, no one had changed a bit.
"What's new?" They'd ask. "Where are you now? Where are you going next?" That sort of thing. "I'll retire by the end of summer" I'd reply. After all, in certain lighting conditions my hair appears grey - so I might look like the father of the guy they knew all those years ago, too. And they were new then, and I was not quite as...
I could stay. I remain dangerous - I am fully capable both mentally and physically and haven't exceeded the federal expiration date, but I choose to go on my own terms. I actually have served with the sons of men I'd served with two decades ago.
Families. Military service is a family bond, and those who serve have families of their own, of the same sort most people do. Over at MilBlogs you will find lines written by soldiers on the front lines, and veterans of those lines. But you'll also find entries authored by mothers, fathers, and wives.
We write things in full knowledge that what we write will be read by members of the family. Sometimes that is revealed:
My daughter read this and was unable to respond and asked me to. Paul was her uncle, she was very small when he met her, so her only insight to him is me. Thank you from both of us in reference to this site.
Bless all of those still so far away from home,
we will never forget.
Posted by Dee at April 8, 2008
Thank you thank you for the tribute to my husband.
Let us all never forget Rick or what happened to our world on that day. It takes much courage to face evil. You are all heros.
Posted by susan rescorla at September 9, 2003 11:02 AM
I am Jonathan's brother and I'd like to thank the ones who left their inputs on this page. To the people who knew Jon always remember how down to earth he was. He was never scared, he always kept it real. He was hard and always lived his life to the fullest. Respect and family values was his way of life. God bless and see when I get there brother. I love you man. Uso pride remains in the blood always. You're my hero aka Bolrok. Your memory will always be kept alive. Peace my brother!Mike Yon told me he sometimes considers leaving Iraq but then hears from a reader who appreciates his efforts, and that little bit keeps him going.
Posted by niko falaniko at April 13, 2004
I know just what he means. I won't be retiring from this effort any time soon.
Mike's book is more than a collection of his dispatches from Iraq, but it opens with one:
Thoughts flow on the eve of a great battle. By the time you read these words, we will be in combat. Few ears have heard even rumors of this battle, and fewer still are the eyes that will see its full scope. Even now - for the battle has already begun for some - little news of it reaches home. I have known of the plans for a month, but have remained silent.I remember it well. I was elsewhere in Iraq at the time, and following his stories quite closely.
Some of the 1920s were about 300 meters down the road by now, and walking into the ambush that had apparently been set for us. BOOOOOMMMM! The detonation looked like it must have killed five or ten of them. What comes next is often shooting and more bombs, so I dove for cover while turning on the video camera, and since I have been practicing shooting both cameras at the same time, got some still shots.In an interesting moment of synchronicity, on my way home from the conference yesterday I found that report from a milblogger in Baqubah now via the Dawn Patrol:
I was told later we were in a real firefight. Hard to tell sometimes because the IAs and 1920s were firing the same kinds of weapons al Qaeda, JAM and all the rest fire. In any case, the one certain thing is that thousands of shots were fired and it was loud. Hot, too.
Some American Soldiers had rushed forward to help the 1920s, but I stayed back with an American platoon. If the lieutenant suddenly realizes he’s lost a reporter on the battlefield, he’s not going to be happy when we get back, so it’s very important that the man who brought you always knows where to find you. Our guys were firing 40mm grenades into the palm groves. The 25mm was booming away.
As the 1920s came streaming back, some had clothes tattered from the blast. They were dazed and agitated. The 1920s man with the clean ammunition belt was dragging it down the road and I walked up and pointed to it and he draped the belt back on his shoulder where it should be. The shooting continued.
I kept making eye contact and the Iraqis seemed reasonably okay. Amazingly, none were killed. The explosion was big enough that had they been walking in a cluster instead of keeping their intervals, there would be 1920s body parts scattered all over the road.
I'm not the only one feeling the boredom, on one of our patrols we paid 4 donkey cart drivers to race, the stipulation, one soldier on the back of each donkey cart. My donkey lost, it tried to kick its driver.I can't be there now, but it's good to stay current.
So is this what we've been waiting for in Iraq? Or is this silence just the prelude to more attacks and violence? In Baqouba I can say that I think this peace will last, at least while my unit is here.
"If you're not there now, you're not current".
I think that's a fair assessment. It's hard keeping current from back here, even with classified reports -- and if you're depending on the open sources (including military ones, for that matter), you're just not getting the real picture.Grim just got back from Iraq a few days ago. He and I were able to meet in person a few times in Baghdad. I'm glad he's home with his family now.
Knowing he's a man just reunited with his wife, I suspect that something in that experience might have led him to writing this post on chivalry. I think it makes a fine companion piece to Cassandra's, and I think both will give you some insight to the "military family".
I also find this review of Grim's post interesting: "This is the kind of bullshit that keeps me from reading most of the mainstream milblogs." (Seems he touched a feminist nerve, he did.) I find other people commenting on milblogs posts who are eager to assure anyone on that same point - "this item I read is the reason I never read this" - a wonderful argument, and one I won't join.
My other favorite complaint: "You're a Republican". (Or substitute Bushbot, Wingnut, or whatever phrase is the designated sophisticated witticism of the day.) No, I might reply, I'm a guy who's been to Iraq, who knows many other people who have - some of whom have been killed or wounded - and communicates routinely with them, and their friends and relatives.
Usually I'm then accused of claiming that only people who've been to Iraq have the right to talk about it. Nope. As a wise man recently said' "Senator, we fight for the right of people to have other opinions".
So we're driving home from the conference, eventually losing the signal from a fine radio station. My traveling companion begins scanning through the channels, as is often the case in the middle of nowhere, USA, the only signal is from an AM talk station. Tony Snow is on for Bill O'Reilly. I'm a bad Republican so I'm not paying much attention and instead reading a blog post from Baqubah on my handheld.
"At the bottom of the hour" Tony says, "we'll talk to Mike Yon about Iraq."
And he did. And we continued southward, then lost the signal just as Mike's segment ended. Hopefully somewhere someone was tuned in who learned something he (or she) hadn't known before. As static noise drowned out the signal we pulled off the freeway to fill the tank.
At the gas station, I saw the cover of USA Today. There, above the fold, was what millions of Americans learned about Iraq that day.
"Iraq Violence taking toll"
"50 Iraqis dead in Suicide bombing, 9a"
"Study: mental strain in US troops, 8a"
The tank was full, we returned to the freeway, and a few hours later I was home.
“I don’t think we should be setting artificial timelines as this is a very challenging undertaking and we need to work with our Iraqi counterparts and make sure that the steps that are being taken are going to work.”
-- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, on Iraq, November, 2003
Part One: A Witness to History
Welcome to Sunday morning at The Church of What's Happening Now. Have a seat, get comfortable, we're just about to begin.
Good morning. Let's begin our Service with a hymn. (Skip it if you wish - though later you'll discover it wasn't chosen at random...)
Thanks to the choir, and thanks again to Mike Yon for use of the photos. Welcome home, Mike. Good to see you're back safely in America. And congratulations on the book. Just finished it last night myself - and if there are bags under my eyes today it's because a good book will keep you up late turning pages.
We'll begin today with a bit of history. But don't worry - here at the Church of What's Happening Now we only look back for context - we'll return to the present shortly.
And we're not going back to ancient history - we're just going back 12 years. Certain events from those days have gained some recent attention. You might think I'm going to jump on a bandwagon and start beating a dead horse by mentioning them here and now, but I assure you I am not - we're heading down a different path altogether here, and I think you'll find some new and surprising things along the way.
Speaking of Mike Yon, a lot of folks these days remark that he's one of the only reporters in Iraq covering the war from the perspective of the troops - something that guys like Ernie Pyle did back in World War II, something that most major news organizations used to do routinely.
The New York Times was certainly doing that as recently as 1996. (And thanks to brother Greg Pollowitz at Media Blog for bringing this to our attention.) Back in those days a civil war had threatened to tear a foreign country apart. It was religious-based conflict - members of two different "churches" were killing each other at an alarming rate. Then the United States stepped in, bombed the hell out of the place, and moved in ground troops to put a stop to it. The U.S. President assured Americans that stopping that civil war - even though it required putting U.S. troops in harms way far from our shores - was the moral and right thing to do.
The story was far more complex than that, of course, and I'm only reducing it to that level to provide brief background. Regardless of what the President had to say on the issue, in those days reporters knew how to tell a story from the perspective of the troops:
March 26, 1996If you're wondering why the President himself didn't go to Bosnia on that trip, it's worth noting that 1996 was a busy year in which he confronted many major foreign policy issues (and ran for re-election, too). I hate to get into too much detail, but here (from a more detailed collection here) are a few things the President might have considered more important at the time (if you're already familiar with those events, feel free to scroll on past them. Notice the five stars below? The 1996 part of our history lesson will end at the next group of five stars.)
In her appearance at Tuzla Air Base, the First Lady told a couple of thousand of the 19,300 Americans serving in Bosnia that they were using military power to advance United States interests and values. She said they were part of "the kind of peacekeeping mission every American should be proud of and support."
I just hope you have some feeling of how proud and grateful all America is," she said.
Today's visit came as some troops, living uncomfortably and often dangerously, continue to wonder about the value of their mission.
During her daylong visit to American forces at three bases in northeast Bosnia, Mrs. Clinton repeated that the United States had a genuine interest in keeping Europe stable. In addition, she said, the effort to stop the war here is the moral and right thing to do.
Among the troops, reaction to the visit ranged from great enthusiasm to only mild interest.
At another camp, named Alicia, from where 600 soldiers in the First Squadron, Fourth Cavalry patrol the zone of separation between the Bosnian Government and Bosnian Serb armies, many soldiers crowded in to see Mrs. Clinton and her daughter, Chelsea.
When they walked through the camp, there was an almost constant clicking and whirring as soldiers took photographs.
As soldiers nudged past each other for a chance to have their picture taken with Mrs. Clinton, Maj. Gen. William L. Nash, the commander of American forces in Bosnia, said: "Look at that. Look at those smiles. It really makes them happy to have her here."
Sgt. Errol Kennedy, from New York City, whooped to his friends: "She's the greatest First Lady we've ever had! I'm ready to spend another year here now."
The very month that Mrs Clinton was in Bosnia, Iraq had denied United Nations teams access to five sites designated for inspection in compliance with UN resolutions passed since the Gulf War of 1991. In response, the President of the U.N. Security Council issued a statement expressing the Council’s concern and demanding that Iraq allow UNSCOM teams immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to all sites designated for inspection. By the end of the month Security Council resolution 1051 was passed, approving the export/import monitoring mechanism for Iraq (for a program approved by the UN the year prior - but initially rejected by Saddam Hussein - that later would be known as "Oil for Food") and demanding that Iraq meet unconditionally all its inspection obligations. In May, Iraq accepted UN Security Council Resolution 986, the initial "Oil for Food" resolution passed over a year earlier in April 1995.
Nearly a full month would pass before Saddam again denied UNSCOM teams access to sites designated for inspection. In response, Security Council resolution 1060 (June 12, 1996) termed Iraq's actions a clear violation of the provisions of the Council's resolutions and demanded that Iraq grant immediate and unrestricted access to all sites designated for inspection by UNSCOM.
Saddam ignored that, so the President of the Security Council followed up with a statement in which "the Council condemns the failure of Iraq to comply with resolution 1060". The Council also asked that the Executive Chairman visit Baghdad with a view to securing access to all sites which the Commission designates for inspection. That visit was made less than a week later, and UNSCOM and Iraq agreed on a Joint Statement and a Joint Program of Action establishing "modalities for inspection of so-called "sensitive sites"". Iraq also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the UN implementing UNSCR 986, the Oil for Food program.
The next month (July) UN Inspector Scott Ritter attempted to conduct inspections on the Republican Guard facility at the Baghdad airport, but was blocked by Iraqi officials. By the time UNSCOM inspectors were allowed into the facility a few days later, they found nothing. In August the President of the Security Council issued a statement in which "the Council strongly reaffirms its full support of the Commission in the conduct of its inspections and other tasks and expresses its grave concern at Iraq’s failure to comply fully with resolution 1060. The Council also states that Iraq’s failure to grant immediate unconditional and unrestricted access to sites and its attempts to impose conditions on the conduct of interviews with Iraqi officials constitute a gross violation of its obligations."
Meanwhile, back in May, under pressure from the United States and Saudi Arabia, Sudan expelled Osama bin Laden, who then moved to Afghanistan. They had been willing to extradite him to America, but as President Clinton would later explain, "Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."
In June, a fuel truck carrying a bomb (estimated at between 5,000 and 20,000 pounds) exploded outside the U.S. military's Khobar Towers housing facility in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, where U.S. troops had been stationed since the end of the Gulf war. The blast killed nineteen U.S. military personnel and wounded 515 persons, including 240 U.S. personnel.
That same month Osama bin Laden called for jihad. His fatwa, published in Al Quds Al Arabi, a London-based newspaper, was titled, "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" - a reference to Saudi Arabia, where US troops had been enforcing the "no-fly zone" and other sanctions on Iraq.
It is out of date and no longer acceptable to claim that the presence of the crusaders is necessity and only a temporary measures to protect the land of the two Holy Places. Especially when the civil and the military infrastructures of Iraq were savagely destroyed showing the depth of the Zionist-Crusaders hatred to the Muslims and their children, and the rejection of the idea of replacing the crusaders forces by an Islamic force composed of the sons of the country and other Muslim people......and so on.
Few days ago the news agencies had reported that the Defence Secretary of the Crusading Americans had said that "the explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar had taught him one lesson: that is not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists". We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! and shows the fears that had enshrined you all. Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in lees than twenty four hours!
But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear.
In response to the Khobar Towers bombing, the Clinton administration launched "Operation Desert Focus" that same month, an effort in which US air assets in Saudi Arabia were relocated from Dhahran and Riyadh to the remote Prince Sultan Air Base.
And it's a good thing they were there! In September, Iraqi Army forces intervened in fighting between Kurdish factions, helping the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) capture Irbil, the main Kurdish city in northern Iraq - inside the Kurdish haven established above the 36th parallel in 1991 and enforced by the US military. The US launched Operation Desert Strike in retaliation. On September 3rd, American forces launched 27 cruise missiles against targets in southern Iraq. Two Navy ships launched 14 Tomahawk missiles, while two B-52s fired 13 conventionally armed cruise missiles. The US also extended the Southern Watch no-fly zone to include all areas of Iraq south of the 33d parallel, one degree further north then the original line and just south of Baghdad. The next day a US F-16 patrolling the extended Southern Watch no-fly zone fired a HARM at an Iraqi SA-8 air defense radar after the radar locked onto it, and four Navy ships launched 17 more cruise missiles against targets in southern Iraq. U.S. military airlift also successfully evacuated thousands of displaced Kurds from the war zone.
Following Operation Desert Strike, Kuwait agreed to a nearly continuous presence of a US military task force there, and the UN postponed implementation of UNSCR986 (Oil for Food).
In November 1996, as Bill Clinton was re-elected President over his Republican challenger Bob Dole, Iraq blocked UNSCOM from removing remnants of missile engines for in-depth analysis outside the country.
On December 10, 1996, the oil-for-food program began operation, and oil flowed from Iraq for the first time since 1990. The first shipments of food arrive in Iraq in March 1997. The first six months of activity under UNSCR986 (14Apr 95) would result in 1 billion dollars in revenue generated providing food and medicine for 18 million Iraqis living under Baghdad rule. Estimates of the death toll resulting from UN sanctions between 1990 and 1996 vary widely; some indicate that 750,000 people died through malnutrition and lack of medicines; and that the rate at this time was 10,000 a month.
As the year drew to a close, on December 30, 1996, the President of the Security Council issued a Statement in which "the Council deplores the refusal of Iraq to allow the Special Commission to remove certain missile engines from Iraq for analysis, and demands that Iraq allow such removal."
So as you can see, it was a very busy year - and one in which the importance of not fleeing from obligations was made clear. And twelve years later, American troops are still in Bosnia (and Kosovo) steadfastly stabilizing Europe and proving that lesson has not been lost.
Much has happened in the intervening decade plus (1998, for instance, was a banner year). But another thing that hasn't been lost is Hillary Clinton's courage to fly into a war zone to visit the troops and let them know how America feels. In fact, she did so in 2003:
TIM RUSSERT: There has been some reaction to comments you made on the ground in Iraq, and let me go through that. This is the dispatch from the Buffalo News: "'The morale of the troops," Senator Hillary Clinton said, "is very high,'" but she said the military personnel with whom she spoke in meetings and wanted to know, quote, 'how the people at home feel about what we are doing.' 'Americans are wholeheartedly proud of what you are doing,' Clinton said she replied, 'but there are many questions at home about the Bush administration's policies.'" Was it appropriate for you to criticize the president while in Iraq?Now, one could perhaps anticipate some discussion regarding the minor differences between that quote and assuring the troops in Bosnia that they were using military power to advance United States interests and values, were part of "the kind of peacekeeping mission every American should be proud of and support", hoping "you have some feeling of how proud and grateful all America is," and ensuring them that the United States had a genuine interest in keeping Europe stable, and that "the effort to stop the war here is the moral and right thing to do."
SEN. CLINTON: You know, I find this so interesting that this has now become an issue, and largely fueled by a lot of the talk shows and the other sort of right-wing apparatus. You know, when a soldier asks me a very direct question, you know, "How do people feel about us and what we're doing here, senator?" -- especially a soldier from the 10th Mountain Division, which as you know is based in Fort Drum, New York, I wasn't going to lie to that young man.
But you have to put those comments into their respective historical context of 1996 and 2003. Bear in mind that in 1996 the US was acting to prevent a religion-fueled civil war from destabilizing all of Europe, while in 2003 the US had unilaterally invaded Iraq based on administration lies/faulty intelligence (your choice) that Saddam Hussein had somehow then or in the future posed a threat to America and the rest of the world and you'll understand the degree of consistency - It really couldn't be more simple.
Still, the appropriateness of Senator Clinton's 2003 comments was questioned by a handful of pundits who were paying attention to her in those days (bear in mind she was not running for President in 2004 - though some claimed she was indeed even then already running for 2008). But before making up your own mind on that topic you might want to make sure you remember exactly what points she herself disagreed with President Bush about. This account of that same Iraq trip (originally appearing in the NY Post but now only available in it's entirety by following links to that old debate beginning here) might help jog those memories:
November 30, 2003—WASHINGTON: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton ventured into Iraq’s dangerous northern region yesterday, as she took another shot at President Bush for trying to move too fast to get troops out of that country.So there you have it. And although she didn't put it in those terms I'd like to believe that in actuality Senator Clinton was demonstrating that the hard lessons learned - regarding abandoning missions all too rapidly - throughout her husband's term in office had not been lost.
As she has on each leg of her three-day trip, Clinton questioned the White House battle plan for restoring order and stability to Iraq and Afghanistan.
“It’s going to take more time than has been allotted for the process to take hold,” said Clinton, referring to the July deadline by which Bush aims to transfer power back to the struggling Iraqis.
“I don’t think we should be setting artificial timelines as this is a very challenging undertaking and we need to work with our Iraqi counterparts and make sure that the steps that are being taken are going to work,” added Clinton, who is due back in Washington today.
Clinton completed her tour of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq with a tense trip into Kirkuk, an oil-rich part of the country dominated by the Kurdish people who were oppressed under the regime of Saddam Hussein.
But enough of the past. It's time to talk here and now - though oddly enough, we're going to return to where we started in order to do so. First, a quick look at the U.S. plan for drawdown in Iraq - and this is the actual slide detailing the actual plan, as presented to Congress by General Petraeus in September, 2007:
One thing you might notice about this slide - the process is "conditions based" - not date based. Hence there are no dates beyond July of this year. (Note: there was no similar slide in his latest briefing package, however it is immediately apparent that those few target dates that are included above have been met thus far.) In reviewing the above, one could almost conclude that someone took Senator Clinton's advice - “I don’t think we should be setting artificial timelines as this is a very challenging undertaking and we need to work with our Iraqi counterparts and make sure that the steps that are being taken are going to work,” - to heart.
It's important that Americans have this fundamental understanding about the basic differences between that plan and those that this years Democratic candidates propose, since like the current administration both Senators Clinton and Obama also want to draw down the troop levels in Iraq, leaving only small advisory/security forces that don't actively participate in large scale combat ops. The difference is that they want to add specific dates to the above chart, creating a timeline rather than use a conditions-based approach.
I'll let Senator Clinton explain - and here's where we briefly return to the beginning of our sermon. This is from her March 17, 2008 speech at George Washington University. You can read the complete text on her web page here:
Good morning. I want to thank Secretary West for his years of service, not only as Secretary of the Army, but also to the Veteran’s Administration, to our men and women in uniform, to our country. I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn't go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went.That's not quite an accurate description (to put it mildly), but it's how the speech began, and it has most unfortunately distracted attention from the parts that mattered. For instance, her explanation of Senator McCain's plan for Iraq:
I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base. But it was a moment of great pride for me to visit our troops, not only in our main base as Tuzla, but also at two outposts where they were serving in so many capacities to deactivate and remove landmines, to hunt and seek out those who had not complied with the Dayton Accords and put down their arms, and to build relationships with the people that might lead to a peace for them and their children.
One choice in this election is Senator McCain. He’s willing to keep this war going for 100 years. You can count on him to do that.But actually, you can't - because that's not his position at all. As with the Bosnia story, I wouldn't want to call this a lie - she might be guilty only of believing what Senator Obama says:
Ever since John McCain said at a town hall meeting in January that he could see U.S. troops staying in Iraq for a hundred years, the Democrats have been trying to use the quote to paint the Arizona senator as a dangerous warmonger. And lately, Barack Obama in particular has stepped up his attacks on McCain’s “100 years” notion.Or she might have been confused by something Obama's campaign manager said:
But in doing so, Obama is seriously misleading voters—if not outright lying to them—about exactly what McCain said. And some in the press are failing to call him on it.
Here’s McCain’s full quote, in context, from back in January:Questioner: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for fifty years…
McCain: Maybe a hundred. Make it one hundred. We’ve been in South Korea, we’ve been in Japan for sixty years. We’ve been in South Korea for fifty years or so. That’d be fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. Then it’s fine with me. I would hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day.
The man who headed the U.S. Air Force during Desert Storm will tell you, over black coffee in a Lake Oswego cafe, that the potential attack on Iraq is "the fight you dream about, a wonderful kind of war to have."But regardless, she moved on to quick dismissal of Senator Obama's plan for Iraq:
"Everybody's going to get decorated out of this thing," says Tony McPeak, a four-star general who retired to Oregon in 1995. "Everyone comes home. It has a lot of appeal to me."
"We'll be there a century, hopefully. If it works right".
Another choice is Senator Obama who has promised to bring combat troops out in 16 months, but according to his foreign policy adviser, you can't count on him to do that. In uncertain times, we cannot afford uncertain leadership.In fairness, you can read Senator Obama's plan here on his own campaign web page. Key excerpt:
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.And finally, Senator Clinton offers her own plan for Iraq:
As president, one of my first official actions will be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my Secretary of Defense and my National Security Council and direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to start bringing our troops home within the first 60 days of my taking office. A plan based on my consultation with the military to remove one to two brigades a month, a plan that reduces the risks of attack as they depart.And there you have it. Her plan differs from Senator Obama's in that while he will immediately began removing one or two brigades per month, she will begin within 60 days, and hers is better because he is not actually capable of doing it.
Again, it should be worth noting that both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama have promised to leave some troops in Iraq - for security and to fight al Qaeda, etc. Neither has given a timeline for when those troops would eventually come home - for all we know, it might be 100 years. Perhaps some energetic reporter might ask them. Further, both Senators are promising more troops for Afghanistan - and once Iraq is abandoned that's probably going to be very critical, for reasons Osama bin Laden explained so carefully back in '96.
Now some among you might be shouting "hypocrisy" (or other less polite terms). Why, you might ask, would someone who cheered the troops in 1996 when the US was acting to prevent a religion-fueled civil war from destabilizing all of Europe, then refused to lie to them regarding American support for a 2003 unilateral invasion of Iraq based on administration lies/faulty intelligence (pick one) that Saddam Hussein had somehow then or in the future posed a threat to America and the rest of the world but who still called for an abandonment of artificial timelines for withdrawal now insist on just that?
Because now, you see,
"...as we continue to police Iraq’s civil war, the threats to our national security, our economy, and our standing in the world continue to mount."Iraq is a civil war now - and we have no business policing other countries civil wars. It really couldn't be more simple.
Anyhow, that doesn't matter - because how she or anyone else feels about the situation in January 2009 is all that matters - and anyone's guess.
Which is why, friends and neighbors, I stated this back in 2003, during the original discussion of Senator Clinton's visit to Iraq:
What I've told troops confronted with "protest" is a bit more simple: "America is with you. As far as the protestors, don't sweat it. You're making history; they're making noise."Which hopefully helps explain the story I tried to tell by including at least one of the pictures in the slide show accompanying this morning's hymn - a tune I wrote during my second tour of duty in Iraq during the surge.
A hymn we'll close with.
Thank you all for coming. Please offer something if you can...
And for further advanced discussion, be sure to consider why you can't pause a timeline that doesn't exist.
See you again soon.
Some days I miss living in Germany.
Some days... not so much.
For Americans, the site of the Sept. 11 attacks in New York is hallowed ground. For a theater in Germany, though, its the perfect setting for a provocative production of Verdi's "A Masked Ball" -- one that includes naked retirees, Mickey Mouse masks and burning Uncle Sam hats.Der Spiegel fails to mention the Hitler mustaches - though the Telegraph noticed them (warning: full frontal cast pictures at this link):
Giuseppe Verdi, one might think, is hard to mess up. But a theater in the eastern German city of Erfurt seems to be doing its best. In a re-interpretation of the opera "A Masked Ball," which opens on Saturday, director Johann Kresnik has hit upon a dramatic novelty: His staging has naked pensioners wearing Mickey Mouse masks, wandering around the ruins of New York's World Trade Center.
In all, there are to be 30 aged nudists -- between 50 and 69 years old -- sharing the stage with a Ground Zero backdrop. In other scenes, actors wander the stage wearing US flags and burning Uncle Sam hats. Indeed, there is little subtlety in the message Kresnik intends to send.
Indeed, though the production looks unlikely to win many prizes for the nuance of its message, Mr Kresnik has succeeded in his other aim, selling out the Erfurt opera house for the premiere.
...As did Victor Davis Hanson:
The last time German opera producers wished to be "provocative," radical Islamists simply shut down their fun with an ultimatum—stop or else. And the home of 80 million and the world's third largest economy of course caved. But this time they got smarter and are now staging Verdi's A Masked Ball on a set of the World Trade Center ruins, with insulting anti-American characters. Two queries: why do they assume that a few death threats from their beheading jihadist enemies are far more worrisome than losing the good will of millions of their tolerant American allies?; and, two, why do German leftists always put Hitler moustaches on those who saved them from their own home-grown Hitler?Though Hitler, I'm sure they'd tell you, was Austrian.
Of course, Germany is always a mix of old and new, as this reviewer of the Erfurt Opera House itself explains:
Germany's newest opera house is located in Erfurt, the capital city of Thüringen. This is the only new opera house to have been built in Germany so far in the 21st century.
My latest visit to Erfurt was to see the operetta Die Dollarprinzessin (The Dollar Princess) by Leo Fall (1873-1925), starring Frauke Schäfer as Alice.
This operetta was first performed in Vienna in 1907, at a time when rich American heiresses were all trying to find European aristocrats to get married to.
Alice in the operetta runs her father's company with an iron hand, and has no time or patience for men of any sort, aristocrats or not. Of course she finally does fall for one, but not until there have been all sorts of wild complications and a trip to Europe. The music is fun, and the Erfurt production is quite clever, including among other things a swimming pool full of dollars, as in a Scrooge McDuck comic.
He and I were able to spend some time together in Baghdad, too. But certainly not enough, as those were busy days.
And what, you might wonder, would two milbloggers discuss with limited time in a war zone far from home?
Horses, of course. And other things.
Speaking of my old friend Bill Roggio, this report is interesting:
Clashes between the Mahdi Army and US and Iraqi forces broke out in Sadr City in Baghdad late Friday after a senior aide to Muqtada al Sadr was murdered in the city of Najaf. US and Iraqi forces confirmed killing 13 Mahdi Army fighters in eastern Baghdad after a series of complex attacks.But that characterization of events is somewhat at odds with this LA Times report from two days ago - which implies that heavy combat has been ongoing there all week, and that there has been no cessation of hostilities since the "Iranian brokered/Sadr declared" (chose one or both) cease fire:
Thousands of Sadr City residents have fled for the relative safety of other neighborhoods. Prices in local markets were soaring as supplies dwindled, a result of suppliers' inability to bring in goods. Iraqi and U.S. forces appeared to be penetrating deeper into the district, one local journalist said.Meanwhile, Major John sends another cryptic dispatch.
There were no signs that Prime Minister Nouri Maliki was pulling back on his offensive against Shiite militias, which has sparked fighting between Iraqi and U.S. forces and militiamen loyal to Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr. Maliki's deadline for fighters to hand in heavy weapons passed Tuesday, but the latest clashes showed that rocket-propelled grenades, mortars shells, and rockets remained in militia hands.
With Bill Roggio, Mike Totten, Austin Bay, Jules Crittenden, and Glenn Reynolds.
I spent time with Mike and Bill in Baghdad, and Jules (who was embedded with the 3ID in the initial invasion) is no stranger to readers here.
..from the Ft Hood, Texas "Salute to Heroes" event here.
As Andi says,
Ft. Hood MWR is hosting a huge all day/all evening concert for our troops today featuring wide ranging genres of music and some wonderful artists. They are expecting 80,000 people to attend. The event is closed to the general public, but the show is being broadcast worldwide.Enjoy.
This-week-in-Iraq-war-history continues with another look-back post, this one originally published in February, 2005. It concerns events occuring at the time of the fall of Baghdad - events that had made headlines again two years later. (And I'd like to think it helped draw a certain mainstream media guy into the blogosphere. I love to corrupt the innocent...)
Milblogger meets reporter: The Mudville Gazette presents an online dialogue on the topic of military targeting of journalists with Jules Crittenden of the Boston Herald. Opinions expressed are those of the individuals stating them, who should not be construed as representing any groups, organizations or third parties. Likewise no endorsement of comments herein by such groups is expressed or implied.
My thanks to Mr Crittenden for taking the time to participate in this discussion.
Eason Jordan has resigned.
That's all well and good, but don't be fooled. The "Easongate" affair is about something more than one man slandering the US Military. As a member of that institution living in Europe I hear such comments more frequently (or at least notice them more often) than many Americans. The more outlandish a conspiracy theory is, the more likely it can be utterred without fear of reprisal in certain circles. Some small kernel of truth that adds any credibilty to the claim is a bonus. After all, journalists do get killed on battlefields. Civilians are often victims of crossfire. Soldiers sometimes mistakenly fire on their brothers-in-arms. It's a small step from those facts to an assumption that somewhere, somehow a soldier might have intentionally fired on a journalist in the heat of battle. That's the start of a slippery slope, nearer the bottom of which some are surprised to find executives with major news organizations opining that such events occur with a frequency that could not be unnoticed by the powers-that-be in both the military and the media.
Although twisted and distorted to fit his purpose, there are facts at the root of Eason Jordan's claim. The genesis of the soldiers targeting reporters in Iraq line could be traced to events in Baghdad during the final days of the invasion. Jules Crittenden of the Boston Herald was embedded with A Co., 4-64 Armor, 2nd Brigade, 3rd ID during the battle for Baghdad, and was on scene when a US Army tank fired on the Palestine Hotel from the Jumhuriyah Bridge on April 8, 2003, killing two journalists. He was quoted ("selectively and/or inaccurately") in reports of the event that are now frequently cited as support for claims of murder committed by US soldiers. If anyone can be called a "fair witness" to both the actual event and the subsequent rise of a distorted version of same its Jules Crittenden.
Just before Jordan's resignation, shortly after I posted Media, Military, and Professional Ethics, Jules and I began the following online discussion:
GH: Military targeting journalists - it's obviously a hot topic these days. But did this really originate with Eason Jordan in Davos, or is he just the guy unfortunate enough to have repeated 'conventional wisdom' in a public forum where someone was ready to call him on it?
JC: Eason Jordan's remarks, as reported, are highly irresponsible and repugnant. But it didn't start with him. The myth about the military targeting journalists in Iraq has a long history, dating back to the Hotel Palestine incident and beyond that to the as-yet unresolved deaths of the ITN crew. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who are willing to think the worst of the US military, and ascribe malicious intent to accidents of war. The head of CNN would appear to be one of them.
The Palestine incident was twice written up, by the Committee to Protect Journalists ("Permission to Fire") and Reporters Without Borders ("Two Murders and a Lie") in biased and sloppy reports that fuel this myth. So when Jordan tells congressmen the military targets journalists, he is only reflecting a view that has been given respectability by deeply concerned professional organizations that have been eagerly seeking out evidence of targeting, and when they can't find it, suggest it must be what happened anyway.
GH: I read a version of the Palestine Hotel story in David Zucchino's book Thunder Run - his version of events spelled out an unfortunate fact of war, a series of events leading to disaster, but just one of the many inevitable tragedies that occurs when 'it' hits the fan.
JC: Zucchino did a great job with Thunder Run. I ran into him in Baghdad on April 7 in the July 14th Square. He and 20 grunts had been dumped in a canal a few days earlier, and he had lost all his gear, but he stuck with the project and moved forward. His book told me all kinds of things I didn't know about things that were happening one to two miles away, and the higher level decision-making. I just had the grunt's eye view on all of it.
GH: Since the event is obviously significant to any discussion of "targeting journalists" I'll offer this excerpt from the book as background for those not familiar with the events of that day. Bear in mind this is the story as recounted by LA Times reporter David Zucchino in his book on the battle - not an official military after action report on the subject. I've added the maps for what should be obvious reasons.
On a balcony outside Room 1502 of the Palestine Hotel, across the Tigris, photographer Faleh Khaiber was trying to get his shots of American aircraft in the skies over Baghdad that morning. Khaiber was an Iraqi, a Baghdad native who worked as a photographer for the Reuters news agency. He was staying in Room 935, but he had come up to the Reuters room because its two balconies faced north and slightly west, affording a view of the west bank of the Tigris. Khaiber was forty-seven, but he looked much younger. He was short and trim, with small features, his black hair tinged with silver and combed forward. He was nimble and quick, and good with a camera.
Khaiber was one of nearly a hundred reporters and photographers staying at the Palestine, a tan, seventeen-story high-rise on the east bank of the Tigris about a kilometer and a half southeast of the midspan of the Jumhuriya Bridge. Some of the journalists had moved in recent days from the Rashid Hotel across the river, which had been seized the morning before by the tanks and Bradleys of the Rogue battalion. All morning on the seventh, journalists had watched from the Palestine as Assassin Company fought off an Iraqi counterattack at the intersection at the foot of the bridge on the west bank. The hotel's balconies and rooftop afforded a fairly good view of the fight, while far enough away, seemingly, to keep journalists from getting caught up in it.
Outside room 1502, Khaiber was photographing the aircraft from the balcony to the east. On the adjacent balcony was one of the occupants of the room, Taras Protsyuk, a Ukrainian-born Reuters TV cameraman, Protsyuk's camera was set up on a tripod, but he wasn't filming at the moment. On the balcony directly below, Jose Couso, a Spanish cameraman for Spain's Telecinco, had set up his camera and was filming the battle across the river.
On his balcony, Khaiber wheeled around and tried to squeeze off a few frames of an aircraft roaring overhead. He wanted to get a few more shots before stepping over to Protsyuk's balcony to retrieve camera gear he had left there.
On the bridge, the tanks began taking fire from a high-rise building at the eastern end, at the northern foot of the bridge. It was a beige structure with a light brown center concrete fa硤e that protruded the length of the building. The crews began returning firing toward the base of the structure, where men with RPGs were running and hiding along the riverbank. Wolford radioed a request for a jet fighter to drop a bomb on the building to Major Rideout back at the palace. The request was passed up the chain of command to Colonel Perkins.
Then the battalion was presented with a piece of intelligence that seemed to promise a way to disrupt the Iraqi mortar fire. Earlier that morning, in the part of the governmental complex controlled by the Rogue battalion, a Bradley crew had destroyed a car loaded with armed men. From the wreckage, the crews had recovered a two-way Motorola radio that was turned on and still working. It was a small black radio. Hearing voices chattering in Arabic, the crewmen turned the radio over to the battalion's military intelligence team.
Chief Warrant Officer Two Willis Young, a fluent Arabic speaker who specialized in human intelligence, was intrigued as he listened to the conversations coming over the radio. He took the radio to Nussio, the battalion's executive officer, who was in the back of his armored personnel carrier next to the converted public toilet that was serving as a command post at the edge of the parade grounds. Young translated for Nussio: someone in a tall building was describing an American tank on the Jumhuriya Bridge. He mentioned that he was in a building that contained a Turkish restaurant.
Nussio radioed Major Rideout at the Republican Palace and warned him that one of Wolford's tanks was being observed by an Arabic-speaker in a building across the river. He was concerned that the speaker was a forward observer-a spotter-for Iraqi mortar and artillery crews.
Rideout radioed Wolford at the intersection: "Hey, you've got an FO across the river with eyes on you. You need to pay close attention. I'll get back to you with more later."
A minute later, Nussio radioed Rideout with an update. The voice on the radio was now describing more tanks across the river. He was telling someone that he wanted mortars fired to try to hit the tanks he saw on the bridge.
Rideout radioed back to Wolford and warned him to watch for mortars.
"We're getting mortars already!" Wolford told him. He described a garage across the river where RPG teams had taken cover behind construction equipment and were firing on his tanks. It was near the tan high-rise building. Rideout told Wolford to look for a building with a Turkish restaurant. That's where the forward observer was.
On the Jumhuriya Bridge, Staff Sergeant Gibson had been told by Lieutenant Middleton that forward observer overheard on a two-way radio was in a high-rise building across the river, trying to direct mortar and artillery strikes. Middleton had relayed the report directly from Wolford, who had told him, "see if you can find a spotter."
Gibson and Middleton were alarmed. At least one artillery shell and several mortar rounds had already slammed down on or near the bridge. If forward observer now had a clear view of the bridge in order to direct mortar or artillery fire, he could easily bring it right down on their heads. American soldiers threatened by mortars or artillery are trained to locate the forward observer and kill him as quickly as possible. "We've got to find this guy," Middleton said.
The tanks were receiving RPG and small-arms fire not only from the tan high-rise directly across the river, but also from gunmen running up and down a stretch of the opposite riverbank that extended hundreds of meters south of the bridge. Some of the tanks returned fire with coax and .50-caliber at RPG and machine-gun positions along that section of the opposite bank. As Gibson searched the opposite bank for anyone in a high-rise building, his gunner yelled up to him, "Hey, Sergeant Gibson, I got a guy over here looking at us with binoculars." It was a man on the upper floor of a light-colored high-rise across the river, about a kilometer to the south.
Gibson dropped down and looked through the tank's magnified sights. The gunner had the sights on 3X magnification. Gibson punched it up to 10X. It was difficult to see through the haze and smoke, but when Gibson scanned the high-rise building the gunner had indicated, he saw a figure holding what appeared to be a pair of binoculars next to something on a tripod.
In his tank at the edge of the bridge, Lustig heard Gibson describe the tripod and "some kind of optics." Lustig thought it might be a GLLD, a ground/vehicular laser locater designator-a tripod-mounted laser targeting device used by forward observers to direct artillery fire.
Middleton relayed the information by radio to Wolford. Moments later, the captain radioed the lieutenant back for a more detailed description. "What do you have?" he asked.
Middleton described the figure on the balcony, the tripod, and what appeared to be binoculars. Wolford asked him for the range-the distance to the building. He knew the marines were moving up the opposite bank somewhere to the south, and he was worried about accidentally firing on them. Middleton said the range was 1,740 meters. The captain told him to stand by.
The radio nets were humming. Wolford was trying to keep Rideout and deCamp informed, while also fielding reports and requests from his platoon leaders and directing his gunner in the firefight. Lieutenant McFarland radioed to ask about Captain Barry's position. Wolford gave McFarland the location, then turned his attention back to the situation across the river. He still wanted bombs dropped on the tan high-rise at the opposite end of the bridge, where gunmen were firing on his tanks. He was also worried about mortar fire, and in particular the forward observer Gibson and Middleton had just identified to the tall building across the river and farther south. The spotter had to be eliminated.
Wolford got back on the radio to Middleton. "Okay," he told him, "you've got permission to take the target out."
Middleton relayed the order to Gibson, who turned to his gunner and told him, "Fire a HEAT round at the target."
The round erupted from the gun tube with an orange flash and tore into the side of the building, just below and to the right of the balcony where Gibson had seen the figure standing. It exploded in a cloud of gray smoke and debris. Gibson was fairly certain he had finally taken out the forward observer.
Moments later, Major Nussio called Rideout with an update from the monitored Motorola conversations. "Whatever you're doing, keep it up. This guy is now calling his buddy and saying he's getting suppressed and has to move."
Rideout radioed Wolford and told him, "Whatever you're fucking doing right now, keep it up! You're starting to move the guy around. He has to find a new location." Rideout thought it was a hell of a coup, to drive out forward observer using a captured radio.
Now there was more fire coming from directly across the bridge. Gibson had his gunner traverse the gun tube. He spotted four men with RPG launchers as they took up firing positions behind a wall in an alley collapsed the wall and, Gibson thought, killed all four men. He traversed the gun tube again and scanned up and down the riverbank, searching for more targets.
Consumed by the fight, Gibson had no idea that the HEAT round fired moments earlier had mortally wounded Taras Protsyuk, the Reuters cameraman who had set up his camera on the balcony. Protsyuk was thirty-five with a wife and an eight-year-old son. The impact had also struck Jose Couso, the Spanish cameraman who had been filming on the balcony below severely wounding him in the face and leg. Couso was thirty-seven, with a wife and two children, aged six and three. Couso and Protsyuk both died of their wounds at Baghdad hospitals.
On the second balcony outside Room 1502, Reuters photographer Faleh Khaiber was knocked unconscious by the force of the blast, his head cut by flying debris. He recovered, along with two other journalists who were also injured by the exploding tank round.
At some point just before the Palestine was hit, Major Mark Rasins, the operations officer for the Tusker battalion, had been frantically trying to help Rideout and Wolford locate the building with the Turkish restaurant-based on the intercepted Motorola conversations. Rasins was extroverted and hands-on - the type of officer who was quick to address problems. Riding in a Bradley at the end of Barry's Cyclone Company as it moved past Wolford's company, Rasins was listening to the discussions over the brigade radio net. He thought the battalion needed to get out into the streets with an Arabic-speaking interpreter to find someone who could locate the Turkish restaurant. Rasins had the Bradley driver rush back to Sujud Palace, where Rideout had told him he could find Abdulla, a university teacher from California who was one of the brigade's interpreters.
Rasins and Abdulla arrived in the Bradley a few minutes later at an intersection held by Barry's company just off the west bank of the river at a bridge north of the Jumhuriya Bridge. They found a cluster of men in civilian clothes near the river. The men were like tourists, craning their necks and trying to see the firefighters raging up and down the riverbanks. Abdulla spoke to a neatly dressed middle-aged man who said he knew where the Turkish restaurant was - it was directly across the Jumhuriya Bridge. It was the beige high-rise. That suggested that the Iraqi spotter overheard on the Motorola had been in that building. The man added that the building housing the restaurant recently had been taken over as the headquarters for Iraqi military intelligence. Rasins grabbed the man, put him in the back of the Bradley, and rushed to the Jumhuriya Bridge. But by the time they reached the intersection, the Palestine already had been hit.
Meanwhile, Colonel Perkins had begun to act on the Tusker battalion's request for an air strike on the beige high-rise. As he discussed the air strike with Major Rideout over the radio Perkins overheard by Greg Kelly, the embedded Fox News correspondent. Kelly was standing next to Perkins on the raised front driveway of Sujud Palace, where the colonel's command vehicle was parked. When Kelly heard Perkins discussing a high-rise building across the Tigris, he told the colonel to make sure the building wasn't the Palestine Hotel. Kelly knew the hotel was somewhere across the river, filled with journalists.
Perkins had never heard of the Palestine. The east bank of the Tigris was not his area of operations. It had been assigned to the marines, who were still fighting their way up through the southeastern edge of city. Kelly told Perkins that most of the foreign press were staying at the Palestine. He knew it was across the river, but he wasn't certain of its exact location.
Kelly offered to call his New York office on his Thuraya satellite phone to try to find someone who could describe the hotel. He was given a number in Amman, Jordan, of a Fox Producer who had recently stayed at the Palestine. Kelly reached the producer and jotted down noted as the man described the hotel. Kelly was trying to relay the descriptions to Perkins, but finally he just handed the phone to the colonel and let him speak to the producer himself. Kelly had been with Perkins for the entire war, and he had never seen him so insistent and agitated.
Perkins wanted to make sure that the building being targeted for the air strike wasn't the Palestine. He sent a soldier down the ramp to get Chris Tomlinson, an associated press reporter embedded with the brigade's Attack Company. Tomlinson, who had served in the army, was wearing a tanker's CVC communications helmet and had been monitoring the brigade's radio traffic. He rushed up the ramp to find Perkins desperately asking about the Palestine. Did Tomlinson know what it looked like?
Tomlinson had never been to the hotel, but he offered to contract the AP reporter based at the Palestine. He sent an e-mail message on his laptop and also tried calling on his Thuraya satellite phone. There was no reply. Much later, Tomlinson realized that the hotel had already been hit and that all the journalists were either fleeing their rooms or helping evacuate the mortally wounded reporters.
Tomlinson called the AP office in Doha, Qatar and asked Danica Kirka, his editor there, for the map coordinates of the Palestine. She didn't know, so she tried calling the Palestine and sending a text message over the AP internal network to the AP reporter there. Again, there was no reply. Kirka told Tomlinson that AP reporter Nico Price, now in Amman, Jordan, had just stayed at the Palestine. She patched Tomlinson through to Price, who gave him a detailed description of the building. Tomlinson took notes, then gave Perkins a description of a tall, pink-colored building with balconies jutting out at an angle. He told him it was located at the sharp bend in the Tigris River, right next to the Sheraton Hotel.
Perkins radioed Rideout at the palace with the description of the Palestine. He told the major that he wanted to be certain the high-rise directly across the bridge wasn't the Palestine Hotel before he approved dropping a bomb on it. Rideout said the high-rise directly across the bridge wasn't pinkish in color, nor was it located next to any other tall building or in the river, which was farther south. Based on the description he had been given by Wolford in preparation for the air strike, Rideout did not believe it was a hotel.
At this point, deCamp got on the net. Perkins told him to make sure his people didn't accidentally fire on the Palestine Hotel. DeCamp had never heard of the Palestine. It wasn't in his sector. The only hotel he knew about was Rashid Hotel, which had been taken by the Rogue battalion the day before. But deCamp did know from Wolford, and from scouts posted behind the Republican Palace, that RPG teams and snipers were firing from positions up and down the opposite riverbank. He told Perkins that he'd find out about the Palestine.
Perkins still wasn't satisfied. He decided to go over to the bridge and personally have a look at the situation across the river.
Meanwhile, deCamp got on the radio to Wolford. In a loud voice that was unmistakable over the net, he asked the captain whether he had fired on the "Palestinian Hotel," as deCamp called it. DeCamp ordered Wolford to make absolutely sure his company hadn't fired on the hotel. Neither man realized that the hotel had already been hit. Wolford, like deCamp, had never heard of the Palestine - or Palestinian - Hotel. He told deCamp that his men had been firing at the beige high-rise directly across the bridge. DeCamp had trouble deciphering the captain's descriptions of a building with a "brown stripe" running down the side and "a pyramid" on top. He decided to get into his tank and go to the intersection to speak with Wolford directly - and to look across the river himself.
It did not take long for the news of an American attack on a Baghdad hotel filled with journalists to hit the international news wires. Between soldiers monitoring BBC radio and reporters imbedded with the Second Brigade, the first reports of the deaths at the Palestine soon reached Colonel Perkins.
Earlier, as he was trying to get a description of the Palestine, Chris Tomlinson had asked his editor in Doha to get word to the reporters inside the hotel to hang bedsheets from their windows as a way of identifying the building. By early afternoon, the bedsheets were out. (Iraqi soldiers later ordered the reporters to remove them.)
From the bridge, Wolford saw sheets fluttering from the building his men had hit, and his heart sank. He glanced over at Middleton, and he saw from the look on his face that the lieutenant knew it, too. It was a miserable feeling.
GH: So you were there?
JC: I was about 100 yards or so from the Jumhuriyah Bridge, down at the intersection of Haifa and Jaffa, when Staff Sgt Shawn Gibson fired on the Palestine. All of us were highly concerned at the time about reports an Iraqi FO had eyes on our position from a tall building in the vicinity. After the big counterattack that morning was fought back, we continued to receive sporadic mortar fire and RPG fire all morning, taking and returning fire from several tall buildings. The tankers on the bridge reported that numerous RPG teams were operating up and down the opposite bank of the Tigris. Gibson saw what he thought was the spotter and fired. He was distraught when he learned his mistake.
GH: And following the events the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders also wrote up reports?
JC: Yes. I was quoted in the reports, selectively and/or inaccurately, and had RWB remove my remarks, which they reported inaccurately and without permission. CPJ, while casting aspersions on the soldiers based on speculation, neglected to include remarks I made on the character of Gibson and CO Capt. Phillip Wolford, whom I knew as professionals who went to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. I lived with them, rode with them into a series of actions and have great respect for them. The Palestine was an accident by well-intentioned men who had been under fire, some of it intense, since dawn the day before.
All of us who went to Iraq, embedded and non-embedded press, knew we could be killed. Many of us narrowly avoided it, but others weren't so lucky. It is part of the deal. What happened at the Palestine underscores the fact that there is no safe place in a war zone. That point also is illustrated by what happened to two European reporters embedded with 2nd Brigade of the 3rd ID, who they chose not to join the assault on Baghdad on April 7 due to the danger. They stayed back at the brigade TOC, where they were killed by an Iraqi missile. So much for second guessing one's safety options.
This concludes part one of this discussion. Have a question or comment? Those who would like to "join" the conversation are encouraged to make use of the comments section below. Thoughtful questions and (respectful) dissenting opinions will be addressed in a future post on this topic.
Thanks again to Mr Crittenden for taking the time to participate in this discussion, and thanks in advance to all those who join in below.
Update/clarification: This post was written by Greyhawk - posted by the Mrs. Apologies for any confusion that resulted!
2005-02-13 18:03:27All done!
Over at MilBlogs, Iraq vet Dadmanly posted an on-scene report from Vets for Freedom's Vets on The Hill event:
Numerous mainstream media outlets covered the outdoor event, as did Amie Parnes for Politico:Bold emphasis added - because I don't think Dadman was aware of the brewing shitestorm. Many (if not all) of those media reports only offered the quote, without that crucial bit of further explanation.Several hundred veterans stood in the cold drizzle Tuesday morning for a man they called their hero.Milbloggers and their readers should be very familiar with Bellavia, a Silver Star decorated combat Vet who’s just published a gritty account of his combat experiences in House to House. His reference played off an earlier description of what it means to be a hero, and how often our society views sports figures as heroes and ignores those who risk all in service to their country.
“You can have your Tiger Woods,” David Bellavia, a former Army staff sergeant, told the crowd of pro-Iraq veterans. “We’ve got Senator McCain.”
Ever alert to a racist dog whistle, Keith Olbermann springs into action:
OLBERMANN, from the April 8 "Countdown" opening credits: Nothing obscure about this: Racism as a Republican campaign plank. Sen. McCain introduced at a rally on Capitol Hill."But if you're wondering if Olbermann and his guest were aware of the context of the remarks, wonder no more:
BELLAVIA, introducing then hugging McCain: You can have your Tiger Woods. We've got Sen. McCain.
OLBERMANN: Did he actually just say that? And why did McCain then embrace him?
Those comments by Sergeant Ballavia - how would you describe them?
Well I think they're pretty ridiculous. I guess one multiracial black man is interchangeable with another. I think that it indicates that Republicans in broad stroke and Mr McCain in particular have a huge problem with black people. This kind of at least racial insensitivity suggests that there's something disturbing going on here and they can't even make a distinction about who the right opponent is of Mr McCain. So I think that it speaks for a broad concern and a kind of legitimate concern for what his candidacy means, especially for black people in this country.
OLBERMANN: When you hear something said like that, is intent impossible to calculate? And does it even matter? Is the idea behind the remarks the same regardless of the intent?
DYSON: Well, my pastor used to say, look, a mosquito's intent is only to get blood from you, but the consequence, it could give you malaria. So at that level, the intent will never exhaust the consequence. The consequence here is huge. Now, we can't discern the person's intent, it may have been fine, but that's even more problematic. If there was no specific and particular and conscious intent to do harm, that means that this grows out of a pattern of habit. That it's just a natural reflex, and that one, you know, interchangeable African-American multi-racial person is as good as the other, or they're indistinguishable...
Viceo at the link.
Damn those pesky milbloggers!
(Title of post explained here.)
So the AP puts out this story:
Gunmen Release 42 Students in IraqWhich may explain why the AP wanted desperately to report on the many ways insurgents are kicking our asses.
2 days ago
BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraqi police say gunmen have released the 42 college students they kidnapped earlier in the day near the northern city of Mosul.
Brig. Gen. Khalif Abdul-Sattar says the gunmen initially released the only two girls aboard the hijacked bus. They later set free remaining occupants after making sure they were not members of the security forces.
The bus carrying the students was ambushed Sunday morning on the main highway linking Mosul with Baghdad.
Abdul-Sattar says another bus carrying students managed to evade the ambush. Three students aboard that vehicle were injured when gunmen opened fire as the driver sped away.
Mosul is located 225 miles northwest of Baghdad.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
BAGHDAD (AP) — Gunmen ambushed a bus filled with college students on the main highway linking Mosul and Baghdad early Sunday, kidnapping 42 people, authorities said.
Meanwhile, overnight clashes in Baghdad's Shiite district of Sadar City left five dead and more than a dozen wounded, police said.
The incidents illustrate the continuing instability in Iraq as the top U.S. officials here prepare to brief the U.S. Congress this week on prospects for further reductions in the 155,000-strong American force.
Juan Cole included it as part of a collection of mainstream media stories detailing how the insurgents are kicking our asses
Up in Mosul, over 200 miles to the north of Baghdad, guerrillas kidnapped, then released, a bus load of 42 college students on Sunday. If guerrillas can do such a thing with impunity in broad daylight, there can't be much security in the Mosul area.Which is arguably true - if you unquestioningly believe mainstream media reports from Iraq (though after 5 years, why would you?)
Credit Cole for publishing this the next day:
With regard to the kidnapping of 42 students from a bus near Mosul, who were later released, I received this from a US military observer in the area:But though the lightbulb sort of flickered, it didn't quite come on:'Mr. Cole,
You should check your sources closer before you report on the "impunity" of the insugents to operate in the Mosul area. My unit was involved in the location of the college students mentioned in your blog. They were not released by the insurgents at their leisure. They were found by coalition forces, engaged to disable the dump truck that the students were being transported and then freed by combined coalition, Iraqi Army and police forces. The four individuals that were driving the dump truck were all detained by Iraqi Army and police units after firing at U.S. helicopters and then hiding among women and children to avoid being fired upon. I know these items are facts as the operation occured a mere three hours after I completed my mission for the day and was briefed by the aircrews that were responsible for the capture. Please know that everyday we see dispicable acts that are perpetrated upon the Iraqi people in the name of the "insurgency". They dare not engage directly because they have learned of the swift and deadly consequences that will occur to them if they do. Also realize that I see the Iraqi security forces taking a larger role in every operation that we conduct here in Ninevah provence of which Mosul is a part. I know that the axiom "if it bleeds it leads" is more true now than ever, but yesterday was a win in the books for the Iraqis and the coalition. Yesterday yielded 42 students that are home with their families, 4 bad guys that are not on the streets, and not a single bystander hurt by coalition or Iraqi forces alike. That is a good news story, not a bullet to show how impotent we are to what is occurring on the ground. '
It is great to have some background on the way the release was accomplished, information that was to my knowledge not reported in the wire services. And it was certainly good news that the students were released. But I didn't say the US military was impotent; what I said was that if people can be kidnapped like that in broad daylight, security can't be very good. And while it is welcome that security was restored for these victims, it still seems like a high crime area. . .Now I'm not a Juan Cole reader (you gotta do better than sitting in your living room regurgitating half assed MSM stories about Iraq to get my attention), but a very well informed commenter here alerted me to the story, in hopes of inspiring more folks to take up Cole's invitation and counter claims like these.
What I can't understand is why I don't get more letters like this one. I take eyewitness accounts seriously. I'm a classic political liberal and I think the maximization of information is intrinsically good for a republic.
Because who has time to spend two seconds looking for MNF-I press releases to get their side of a story? (Hint: not the AP)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEWhich, oddly enough, came out the same day as the AP story.
RELEASE No. 20080406-04
April 6, 2008
Iraqi Security Forces rescue 42 kidnapped students
MOSUL, Iraq – The Iraqi Army rescued 42 college students after they were kidnapped by insurgents in southwestern Mosul April 6.
The Iraqi Army detained one suspect, and Iraqi Police are currently searching for additional suspects.
After Iraqi Security Forces reported the kidnapping, a Coalition force aircraft spotted a suspicious vehicle thought to contain the students. The insurgents fled the scene after the vehicle was stopped.
Some of the students left the area but were picked up by Iraqi Security Forces while others made their way a nearby Iraqi Security Forces combat outpost.
All 42 students are accounted for and are safe.
The Iraqi Army detained one of the insurgents at a nearby house. Iraqi and Coalition forces continue to search for others individuals involved in the kidnapping.
“Today’s efforts by the Iraqi Security Forces display not only their commitment to tracking down insurgents, but also their ability to secure the future of Iraq,” said Maj. Gary Dangerfield, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment spokesperson.
The incident is under investigation by the Iraqi Security Forces.
Update: Via comments below, looks like the AP could have rounded out their story if they had checked with (pauses for dramatic effect)...
AP photojournalists Evan Vucci and Maya Alleruzo are on scene when U.S. and Iraqi forces rescue a group of Mosul University students who were taken hostage.Link is to the AP video.
What is with bogus bus stories from Iraq these days?
If you listened carefully during General Petraeus' briefing, amidst all the questions regarding exactly how badly the Army is broken because of Iraq, you might have heard brief mention of this news story:
3rd ID completes re-up goal in unprecedented timeIn case that wasn't clear, I'll explain: the 3ID - the Division that took Baghdad in 2003, did a second tour in Iraq in 2005, and then bore the brunt of the surge in 2007, exceeded it's re-enlistment goal for FY2008 half way through the year.
The 3rd Infantry Division, headquartered at Fort Stewart, Ga., completed its fiscal year 2008 retention goal in less than six months, which most view as a phenomenal act.
This is unprecedented according to the division’s retention sergeant major. “I’ve been in this career field for 16 years, and I’ve never known of a division to meet its goal in such a short time,” said Sgt. Maj. Kelvin Raibon, the 3rd Infantry Division Retention sergeant major.
This is the division’s third deployment to Iraq since 2003, but its high operational tempo did not stop 4,000 Soldiers from re-enlisting. Even more troops will follow their lead, and by the end of March one battalion with the 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, out of Fort Benning, Ga., will have met its retention goal twice.
The 1st Battalion, 15th Infantry Regiment is four Soldiers away from retaining 200 percent of its goal.
These Soldiers are working together to defend their nation. This is why they joined and why they re-enlisted, said Sgt. 1st Class Thomas Olson, 3rd HBCT senior career counselor.
The 3rd Infantry Division, which is currently the headquarters for Multi-National Division – Center in southwest Baghdad, arrived in theater as part of the Surge. Its Soldiers are serving a 15-month deployment with the combat mission to stop insurgents from bringing bomb-making materials into Baghdad. Within the year, Soldiers have secured most areas, and have begun working closely with the Iraqi Security Forces and tribal leaders to build the economy and make life better for its citizens.
But I was just kidding when I called it a "news story" - no national news source in America would ever even consider running a story like that.
"Big Media" did cover the 3ID back when they were getting ready to deploy, though. Reporters from as far away as San Francisco were all over the story:
Some had only a few days to learn how to fire their new rifles before they deployed to Iraq -- for the third time -- last month.I think that still takes the prize as the most ignorant, self-contradicting argument ever made.
Oh, and welcome home to the 1st Brigade.
And here - from Nov, 2007, is one of the Division's re-up ceremonies in Baghdad:
And a bit of history:
This week marks the fifth anniversary of the battle for Baghdad. We'll be reviewing that event here. As part of that look back, here's a Mudville entry from 2004...
On the west side of the highway, Schwartz noticed a series of flower shops and greenhouses. It looked like one of those nurseries commonly seen on highways outside American suburbs. There were drooping awnings, perennials in big plastic pots and trays of annuals, shrubs and hanging baskets, and sheets of plastic blotting out the hot April sun. Behind the plants were rows of heavy clay pots, and behind them were men with automatic rifles and RPGs, crouching and hiding, apparently in the mistaken belief that a half inch of baked clay and a few pounds of dirt would shield them from coax rounds or Twenty-five Mike Mike. They were all reloading, having pelted the front of the column. Now they were setting up to unload on Schwartz and his vehicles. Schwartz was amazed. The gunmen appeared to have no idea how vulnerable they had left themselves.
Schwartz yelled to his gunner, "Spray some ammunition in there." That would get their attention, Schwartz thought. It would keep their heads until the Bradley gunners behind Schwartz could get a fix on them, Schwartz radioed the Bradley commanders: "There's a florist, a nursery coming up on your left. Destroy that nursery."
The Bradleys obeyed. Schwartz watched the clay pots explode, right down the road, one by one. Twenty-five Mike Mike is a high explosive round. It hits and pops. The clay pots disappeared, and so did the men behind them. They evaporated in a spray of dirt and clay, their weapons flying. Four of the Bradleys went at it, killing a few, then passing the targets back to the next Bradley, which killed a few and passed the work back. They were finishing their work. They put perhaps a hundred rounds of Twenty-five Mike Mike into the nursery, and then it was gone, and a couple dozen fighters, more or less, were gone too.
"Okay, you're done," Schwartz said. "Shut it off." The 25mm gun tubes swung back north and the Bradleys plowed forward, the gunners searching through their thermal sights for more targets.
The enemy kept coming. Soldiers and civilian gunmen were arriving now in every available mode of transportation-hatchbacks, orange-and-white taxis, police cars, ambulances, pickups, big Chevy�s, motorcycles with sidecars. Major Nussio, the battalion executive officer, opened fire on a huge garbage truck with a soldier at the wheel. He was thinking to himself as the soldier keeled over and the truck crash-landed: A garbage truck? These people are so stupid - stupid but determined.
They were not giving up. It seemed suicidal - men with nothing more than AK-47s or wildly inaccurate RPGs were charging tanks and Bradleys. It was like they wanted to die, or worse, they just didn't care. That disturbed some of the tankers. They weren't trained to fight people who didn't give a damn. Nor were they quite prepared to fight people who didn't have a plan - didn't have a clue. As each RPG team or pack of dismounts attacked with utter disregard for what the other Iraqis or Syrians were doing, the tankers kept thinking: It's all a big trap. They really do have a plan. They're just luring us in with those haphazard, disjointed tactics. Sometime soon, they're going to get organized and attack with some serious tactics.
At one point, a little white Volkswagen Passat suddenly appeared on the highway. It came off one of the access ramps. Before anyone could react, the Passat turned sharply and smacked into one of the Bradleys. Everyone thought it was a suicide car, but nothing exploded. The driver opened the door and stepped out, his hands raised over his head. He was a portly middle-aged man with a trim black mustache and wavy silver hair. He wore an Iraqi military uniform with a colonel's gold rank on his epaulets. There was a pistol on his hip.
The Bradley commander radioed Captain Hilmes. "Sir we got an Iraqi general here," he said, misreading the colonel's rank. "He just crashed his car into our Bradley. What do you want us to do with him?"
"Capture his ass," Hilmes ordered.
Several infantrymen climbed out of the Bradley's hull and snatched the colonel and dragged him inside. Later under interrogation by U.S. military interpreters, the Iraqi said the was the military quartermaster for all of Baghdad. He was a brown shoes guy, a desk officer. He had been driving to work, minding his own business - and suddenly he was involved in a fender-bender with an American Bradley Fighting Vehicle. He told his interrogators that he had no idea American forces were in Baghdad. From what he had been hearing on government-controlled radio, American forces had been stopped cold below the Euphrates River, well south of the capital. He certainly never expected to see tanks in Baghdad. Every officer he knew was convinced the Americans were afraid to bring tanks into a city.
It was baffling. Senior Iraqi officers in the capitol seemed content to believe their own lies, that the war was going well and the Americans were bogged down south of the city. Even many ordinary civilians seemed unaware that there was a war going on. Despite the columns of black smoke from burning vehicles and the thunderous pounding of the tanks and the Bradleys, civilians in family sedans were coasting down the southbound lanes of Highway 8 and along the access roads, like it was just another Saturday morning in the suburbs. For all they knew from listening to government radio, the war was confined to the southern desert, where American forces were being routed. It was only the Fedayeen and Syrians, and unknown numbers of Special Republican Guards, who seemed to understand that American forces were invading the capital. And if these soldiers and fighters and militiamen were disorganized and poorly trained, they did not lack for determination or gall - and there seemed to be an endless supply of weapons and ammunition, and of gunmen eager to fight and die.
Chaos and carnage, as described in the book Thunder Run: The Armored Strike to Capture Baghdad, picked up by yours truly at the exchange today. If there are fewer posts than normal here this weekend, it's because I'm turning pages.
Until CB's book comes out, this will do nicely.
Original post: 2004-08-28 03:23:08
It's not always the case, but often when I'm not writing a lot here it's because I'm writing a lot at MilBlogs (like this weekend, f'rinstance.)
My copy of Mike Yon's book Moment of Truth in Iraq arrived yesterday. (Or maybe before - I've been too busy to check mail here lately...)
April 4, is the anniversary of the death of SFC Paul Ray Smith, the first recipient of the Medal of Honor KIA in Iraq in 2003.
Composure in the line of fireHere is an animated video version of the events on the day Smith was killed.
The consequences were dire. If Smith's troops broke, the Iraqi troops would be able to move potentially unimpeded from the courtyard gate all the way to a nearby command center, flanking a mortar unit, and overrunning a station that held both the wounded and several embedded journalists.
Specialist Medrano was among the soldiers trying to get the wounded soldiers out of the damaged personnel carrier and down the road to the aid station. During his three years in the Army, he had spent all but a few months under Smith, subject to his meticulous weapons checks but also a witness to another side of the hardened soldier - a side that sometimes cracked jokes, a side that stayed up nights in Kosovo talking with Medrano about family, a side of a sergeant that embraced a lowly specialist.
"All the training I did, and all the things I learned were from him," he says. "He was always trying to take care of you."
At that moment, as Medrano was lifting one of the wounded to safety, he glanced up at Smith, who was now manning the gun atop the personnel carrier. "We made eye contact, and he just waved me off," says Medrano. "He was telling me to take care of these people."
With the help of several other soldiers, Smith backed the vehicle into the courtyard so that he could cover both the tower and the gate. For perhaps 10 minutes, he fired more than 300 rounds to prevent the Iraqi forces from spilling through the bulldozer-made hole in the wall and on to the command center.
"Not all soldiers would jump on top of a vehicle that has already gotten hit while bloody people are being taken out of it," says Medrano. "He did it because he knew if he didn't, we would get slaughtered."
Led by another sergeant, Medrano and two other soldiers used Smith's covering fire to move cautiously to the base of the tower, where they took out the Iraqi soldiers. But by that time, Smith's gun, too, had fallen silent. He had been shot in the head, the only US fatality in the firefight.
Thanks to his fellow Dog Faced Soldier, CJ who has more
May he never be forgotten.
You can now watch the Bad Voodoo episode of Frontline online here.
The Mrs is away for a while.
One of those knew it was coming phone calls came from home, and within a few short hours she had packed the black dress and boarded a plane. The rest of us are here contending with work and duty and school and school plays that mom won't attend and hopefully remembering to feed the dogs and hoping we don't each feed them more than twice a day because the dogs won't utter a word of complaint about that...
So if you don't see a Dawn Patrol around for a while, that's why - though I wouldn't be surprised if we do. (Still, perhaps it's a good time to review the archives, see what you might have missed.)
But back here in the control room there's a post waiting - one she wrote last week because she wanted to make sure it wasn't forgotten. That's the same reason she does everything she does here.
But for a few days she'll be spending time with someone else who won't be forgotten. Your thoughts and prayers are appreciated.
Let me get this straight...
1. IED hits civilian bus in southern Iraq
2. US/Iraqi military convoy stops and renders aid.
But the driver, Zeki Abdul Qader, and a passenger, Qasim Salih Jubur, said they believed the U.S. soldiers opened fire on the bus after it had already safely passed what they were later told was a spot where a roadside bomb had exploded. They said their bus was struck with bullets seconds before they were hit with the explosion, which they believed was some sort of rocket or grenade fired from the U.S. convoy.But...
"The Americans shot us," Jubur said. "One hundred percent it was the Americans."
Qader, the driver, said he was reaching the tail end of a long military convoy when he heard gunfire and the sound of bullets striking his bus.
"They shot me with small arms from the beginning of the bus to the end, the whole side, then they shot this rocket," Qader, 58, said in a telephone interview. The explosion tore through three rows near the middle of the bus -- four passengers per row--killing 12 people almost instantly, he said. Four others on the bus were also killed, he said.
"The bus turned to all black smoke, you could see nothing, and all the windows blew out except one or two," he said. "The bus went off the road and I tried hard to keep it from flipping over."
After the bus stopped, U.S. soldiers cordoned off the surrounding area and Iraqi forces arrived at the scene. Qader and Jubur said they themselves did not see American soldiers firing but heard the gunfire and were told by the Iraqi soldiers that the American troops had fired.
Abbas al-Khafaji, director of the funeral home in Najaf where the bodies were taken for burial preparation, said one infant and at least four women had bullet holes in their bodies in addition to shrapnel wounds. Ali Hussein, 37, the uncle of the slain 6-month-old, Abbas Jihad, confirmed that the boy had two bullet wounds in the chest.
When I was a boy my Dad used to tell me don't believe everything you hear, read or see. Again, I find myself reminded of his wisdom. Here in the last couple days I have been reading, hearing and watching the complete and utter failure in journalism. The other day the boys of Bad Voo Doo and I were on a mission in southern Iraq and where only a short distance from what has been reported as a travesty, tragedy and another example of the reckless US Army.There's much more at the link.
While assisting a bomb blast that struck a civilian bus that was in the vicinity of the convoy immediately to our front I did not see a single news reporter or media person. By the time I got to my destination the reports were already online about the casualties and conduct of the US Forces. Pray tell where were the media getting their information?
By the way, the milblogger on the scene was Toby Nunn, a member of the Bad Voodoo Platoon featured in tonight's Frontline..