'More troops' call as Iraq murders soar - 234 bodies dumped in Baghdad in only 11 days

Source: The Observer



Read more: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2078422,00.html

At least, that's the new talking point on Fox Noise Channel.

According to my prediction.

Some people say.

to the GC ban on torture...

:sarcasm:

They can always extend deployments to 2 years, or 3.
What do they care what they are doing to our soldiers?

... may be looking at an earlier call-up.

(i use that term loosely) cares not what is happening in their country or incapable to do anything to stop it. they do not have any clue about how to go about even forming the basic functioning government and provide the basic security for their citizens. they have`t established the court system to deal with anything from basic civil to capital cases.
we are sending the some of our best people to fight and die for this iraqi government....why?

not one more

the Coalition of the Willing invaded their country; killed off their leadership; destroyed their infrastructure; imprisoned and tortured their young men/women; and installed a puppet government to be in charge of this fledging democracy. Now their government cannot make any decisions that do not meet with our approval. Plus, the interim government that we installed prior to this new democracy - passed all types of laws that sever ly restrict the rights of this new government and gave control of their natural resources to major international corporations; and finally, the proxy-government has imposed an ownership society that we in the US could not afford. _ Oh, I neglected to say, all this without finding the WMDs.

This shit storm or chaos that you are so upset about - was supported by 70% of the American population - as those supporters willing supported the pre-emptive attack on a sovereign nation that had done nothing to us. (And, please cut me some slack on how we didn't know..there were sources that we could have explored to find out. I bet if it had been information about the 'American Idiot' we would have found out). We ignored the United Nations when it appeared that they would not allow our invasion of this Country, then further redefined Europe as 'Old' versus 'New, as we also decided that 'french fries' were not 'freedom fries'.... So, this Administration that we (in general terms) supported was forced to beg the UN to take over this mess a couple years ago - which they refused; Now we are begging 'old' Europe to please get involved to help stabilize the Middle East so that this does not spread. And belatedly, we realize that IRAN has been the winner of this mess, and Saudi Arabia is now pursuing their own self interest as they walk away from any close associations with our current government.

And now, we have the nerve to be upset that they are not throwing roses at our feet? After the information about torture, mass killings & rapes that have occurred under our stewardship.... well, I guess they don't truly appreciate what we have given them. Ungraceful people. We will be damn lucky that they do not do to the potential US soldiers that might be prisoners, what we have done to theirs.

I am not even going to speculate on the potential blow-back of this mess OR future impacts that the creation of the huge private army without any governmental accountability is going to create for the world in the future. (Tell you a secret - this army is going to want to continue to be paid in the future - once we officially leave Iraq, now speculate on that). We not only corrupted the instruments of war - we soiled our Constitution, our government, our national integrity, and our international image. To this day, our political discourse fails to bring any type of accountability to a man that is mentally, emotionally, and psychologically ill-prepared to be an adult, yet is the president. And I can't say a word about that psychopath running either the vice-president's office.

God I hate this war and what our nation allowed to happen...

But, really, maybe this might help to understand part of the 'why' ...reference your question. The IRAQ people owe the US government, military, and people - nothing, not even respect.

all your needed was the last few lines :)

"But, really, maybe this might help to understand part of the 'why' ...reference your question. The IRAQ people owe the US government, military, and people - nothing, not even respect."

The sooner people on all sides of this mess realize the truth in that statement the sooner we can start saving some lives and maybe help build a better nation both in Iraq and here at home.

if they pull out. We know what the consequences are and they are too many to imagine and they are making them worse.

... than it already is. In fact, it is also possible that the Iraqis will find a new national sense of pride in having purged the US from their country, and will band together to expel the remaining foreign fighters (i.e. al Qaeda).

The bottom line is... America missed its window to help (putting aside the fact that we never should have invaded), and now has no credibility and no support within the country. The sooner the American taint is removed from the Iraqi government, the people will begin to have more faith and ownership in governing. But to achieve this, all US military and political influences, governmental or private, must be removed from the country.

The crimes committed against Iraq by this Administration....must be prosecuted at the Hague.....

I believe that the * Adminstration (Cheney, Condi, Wolfowitz etc) are still trying to figure out how they can control the oil.......and that is why they will send more of our troops to die.....and that is the real crime among the others...

There is absolutely no accountability to where the oil that has been produced is going....None...

Welcome to DU!:hi:

It's hard work, incredibly hard, to turn that corner.

We are just giving them more targets.

From the article:

"Iraqi and American officials have long contended that oil smuggling from fields controlled by Shia militias in the south is costing Iraq billions of dollars - funds that, it is feared, are going to armed groups."

Weren't we told it would be revenue from Iraq oil that would be used to rebuild and stabilize the country?

Before it was 40-50 bodies a day. Don't you libruls see how great life is in Peoria, Eye-Rack?

</bushtard>

Iranian model will be accepted. They have the Lebanese model, rather.

The Sunnis who are religious are drawn towards the big brother of Riyadh, while the religious Shia are drawn towards Teheran. The Christians, Kurds and other religious/ethnic minorities and the secular are drawn towards flight for safety or else entrenching their own autonamous civil society, such as in Kurdistan. However, the fight for control of Mosul and Kirkuk are on the eyes of the Arabs against the government in Arbil.

Lest we forget our own Western Civ II classes, lut us consider the basket case that was Germany at the eve of the Forty Years War. Then after the Peace of Augsburg, the real battle began as various statelets competed for the attention of secular France, Catholic Austria and Protestant Prussia.

Even English and Irish history, with its bloody revolutions and religious persecutions as Blighty argued with one another, switching from Catholic to mildest possible Protestant, to moderate Protestant, back to Catholicism, to extreme Protestantism, and then their own upheaval within the Extreme Protestant camp. Finally settling on a prayer book and the Crown appointing the bishops, a partition and its own Catholic Republic. There is no point in going into ethnic division on those two large wet islands off the French coast in detail as one gets the drift. . . .

If a geographic area is hobbled together into the confines of an Empire then loosely governed and largely left to its own devices, save for the law enforcement and the military quota, then "Iraq" is a poster child for how not to "liberate" a nation. First the Ottomans and then the Brits and now us, and nobody ever asked the people of each region what they wanted as a government. Noone at all.

Would anyone care if the provinces of Iraq were independent or a loose federation if their main product were goat skins and figs? Of course not. It is all about other players: namely the US/UK thwarting the Persians, the Persians thwarting the US/UK and the Arab monarchies and the Israelis holding the "prospect of a mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv" as international sabre rattling. And oil.

Oil and revanche, revanche and oil -- add in hegemony and one has the seeds of chaos as people who lived next door to one another for centuries revert to their basest tribality in the absence of a functioning civil government and an awful lot of guns and explosives lying about.

Does "Iraq" even exist except as a nighmare taking lives daily on every side? Should we care more about the people who are on paper Iraqis or the state that was developed there? I opt for the people.

I belive in Churchills notes he says that cobbling Iraq together was one of his biggest mistakes...

I too believe that the US should have paid attention to Britains failures but this administration refused....and in doing so committed "Crimes against Humanity".....I hope we get to see them prosecuted at the Hague...

... until September. If we actually look at what's happening, we'll know le Surge is failing; instead, we'll be educated that no judgements may be made until after Petraeus' September report, and that everything between now and that September report are just a comma.

From the Guardian article...

Ironically, the violence in Diyala has been exacerbated by an influx of both Shia and Sunni fighters displaced from Baghdad by the surge and also from Anbar province who have relocated to Diyala to join a series of jihadi and nationalist groups already based there.

"Ironically"? Hardly. "Predictably" would be more appropos. The whack-a-mole nature of the security effort has been S.O.P. since the beginning of the Iraq occupation, with the "Surge" marking no actual change in strategy, whatsover.

Bush lost this war as soon as he invaded, having failed to honestly win support for the cause... doomed to have superficial support rapidly fall away as the realities of the conflict forced their way into the public's attention. Bush failed to send enough troops to "win." He invaded "with the Army he had" because, quite simply, his case for war couldn't have withstood the most trivial of scrutiny... and certainly not the degree of analysis that would have occurred, in the Fall of 2002, had he called for a mobilization of the number of troops necessary to have secured the country.