Friday, May 28, 2010

And a big yellow taxi took away my old man

CNN.com's pages listing the casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq began as we prepared a special report to cover the invasion of Iraq. One of the elements of the special report had to be a page listing the names - and when possible - the photos of the men and women who died while serving in the conflict. I did not update the page at the start of the war but once "major combat" ended, the responsibility of adding names to the list returned to me.
See the Home and Away casualties interactive
I remember thinking then that the war was not over and as the months went by, the number of fatalities began to climb. In 2004, we added another page listing the names of those who died serving in Afghanistan and other countries.
I don't think anyone ever thought that the list of casualties from both wars would eventually encompass more than 6,000 names from 32 countries. It includes six recipients of the Medal of Honor, all posthumous, and one posthumous recipient of the British Victoria Cross.
It is also a list that, unfortunately, keeps growing, just like the civilian toll, which is even higher.

The above is from Douglas Wood's "Home and Away: Tracking the casualties of war" (CNN). Monday is Memorial Day and remember John King USA will be noting the fallen on Monday's program (7:00 p.m. EST). Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times offers Douglas L. Kriner and Francis X. Shen's "America's 'casualty gap':"

Nationally, in the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq wars, communities in the lowest three income deciles suffered 35%, 36% and 38% of the casualties, respectively. Yet communities in the top three income deciles sustained significantly fewer casualties -- 25%, 26% and 23% of the casualties, respectively.
More advanced statistical analyses, which account for a variety of other important factors, also offer strong evidence of casualty gaps between communities with different levels of income and education. In Los Angeles, for example, citywide almost 27% of residents hold a college degree. By contrast, in the specific L.A. neighborhoods that have lost a young man or woman in Iraq, less than 12% of residents graduated from college. Similarly, in New York City, the citywide average median family income is nearly $42,000, while the average in neighborhoods that have experienced an Iraq war casualty is $34,000, 19% lower.

Which you might think would have some sort of impact; however, you would be wrong.

Late last night
I heard the screen door slam
And a big yellow taxi
Took away my old man
-- "Big Yellow Taxi," written by Joni Mitchell, first appearing on her Ladies of the Canyon album.

This week's big yellow taxi is the US Senate which, Brian Faler (Bloomberg News) notes, pushed through the war supplemental bill late last night on a 67 for and 28 against vote. Bill now goes to the House which will debate it sometime after their Memorial Day vacation.


Foreign Policy In Focus' Bonnie Bricker and Adil E. Shamoo's "Will US Troops Ever Leave Iraq?" (Antiwar.com) notes some of the truths that should be discussed openly but are instead being ignored:

Now, in 2010, a drawdown of troops in the barely organized chaos of Iraq marches towards benchmark dates. But with the sharply decreased American media coverage of Iraq, much of the news has focused on random bombings around the country and partial coverage of the recent Iraqi elections. How many average Americans are aware that while troop numbers come down, contractor numbers go up? The number of troops in Iraq is supposed to go down by this August to 50,000 but with contractors the number would be 125,000. Can you imagine that candidate Obama would have campaigned on the promise of having 125,000 personnel in Iraq by the end of summer 2010? How many total U.S. personnel would be left by the end of 2011? Is the number by end of 2011 zero as promised, or 50,000 or more? Who is reporting about special operations in Iraq involving troops that are not Iraqi-based, but merely sweep in, do their work, and sweep out again?

In order to understand policy implications, Americans need information about the current status of Iraq, as well as the impact of policies as changes are anticipated. Should we keep large numbers of U.S. troops in Iraq for an extended period to ensure security in Iraq? Should we withdraw as quickly as possible so that Iraqis fully determine the outcome of their country? Is our oil policy good for Iraq or good for America and the West or both? Do policies based on sectarian divisions in Iraq promote fairness — or rabid sectarianism? These are the kind of questions that many Iraqis are asking and Americans must openly discuss. Democracy in our country and in Iraq depends on information, and with that, open and honest discussions.

The Senate Democratic Policy Committee continues to highlight the economy and finances and the Gulf Disaster:

As the BP oil spill continues, the Gulf Coast ’s fishermen, tourism industries, small businesses, and local governments are being threatened with serious economic costs. While the total economic impact of the spill remains to be seen, it is clear that the damages will be significant, given that the tourism and fishing industries alone generate billions of dollars each year.

Here are just a few examples of the value of the industries to the Gulf Coast .

Tourism— Gulf Coast

1. The value of the Gulf Coast ’s tourism industry [EPA; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

$20 billion


Tourism— Florida

2. The value of Florida ’s tourism industry [Miami Herald; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

$60 Billion

3. The percentage reductions in hotel occupancy rates between Pensacola and Panama City [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

30 Percent

4. The estimated percentage reductions in hotel occupancy rates during Memorial Day along the Florida panhandle[1] [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

70 Percent


Tourism— Alabama

5. The amount of money spent by tourists on Alabama ’s beaches in 2008 [Reuters; Last Accessed 5.18.08]

$2.3 Billion

6. The number of workers supported by tourists on Alabama ’s beaches in 2008 [Reuters; Last Accessed 5.18.08]

41,000

7. Percentage of cancellations already being recorded on Dauphin Island where the first tar balls came ashore [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.08]:

50 Percent


Tourism— Louisiana

8. The amount of money domestic travelers spent in Louisiana in 2008 [Louisiana Office of Tourism; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

$9.3 Billion

9. The amount of tax revenue for generated by domestic travel in Louisiana for federal, state, and local governments in 2008 [Louisiana Office of Tourism; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

$1.1 Billion

10. Number of Louisiana ’s 64 parishes that received over $100 million in travel expenditures in 2008 [Louisiana Office of Tourism; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

15


Commercial Fishing— Louisiana

11. The value of the commercial seafood industry in Louisiana [The Economist; Last Accessed 5.18.08]:

$2.4 Billion

12. The percentage amount of seafood that Louisiana catches in the continental U.S. [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.08]:

40 Percent


Commercial Fishing— Gulf Coast

13. The size of the area in the Gulf of Mexico currently closed to fishing [Associated Press; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

46,000 square miles

14. The value of the commercial seafood harvest that was to begin on May 15th [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

$21 Billion

15. The percentage amount of total U.S. seafood production coming from the Gulf Coast [Wall Street Journal; Last Accessed 5.18.10]:

20 Percent


Recreational Fishing— Louisiana

16. The value of the recreational fishing industry in Louisiana [The Economist; Last Accessed 5.18.08]:

$1 Billion

DPC FACT SHEET | Economic Statistics of the BP Oil Spill


The following community sites updated last night:





And we'll close with this from Military Families Speak Out:

Contact: Nikki Morse, 347-703-0570, nikki@mfso.org
Deborah Forter, 617-983-0710, deborah@mfso.org


May 27, 2010, Nationwide -- This Memorial Day Weekend, Gold Star Families Speak Out members whose loved ones died as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and Military Families Speak Out members who have a loved one who has previously served or is currently serving in Afghanistan or Iraq, can speak a truth Americans need to hear.

Celeste Zappala, a member of Gold Star Families Speak Out from Philadelphia, PA, whose son was killed in Iraq and was the first Pennsylvania National Guardsman to die in combat since World War II, said,

"With great sadness my family and I recognize Memorial Day and the 7 years since we last saw my son, Sgt. Sherwood Baker alive. On April 26, 2004 he died in an explosion while looking for the nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. We are but one of the over 5,000 American families who mourn the loss of their loved ones in Iraq and Afghanistan; physical and spiritual casualties affect thousands more - and yet the wars that kill our young and drain our treasure do not create peace. It is long past time to bring our troops home, and find real solutions for Peace."

Earlier this month, an ABC News /Washington Post poll found that a majority of Americans are again opposed to the Afghanistan war, with 52% saying it's not worth fighting.

Military Families Speak Out members Larry and Judy Syverson, of Richmond Virginia, said,

"We are the parents of three active duty sons. Our oldest son, Branden, is in Afghanistan with the Second Infantry (our family's sixth deployment in these wars). We are disheartened by Obama's foreign policy. With the 1,000th American soldier killed in Afghanistan this past week and war spending reaching $1 trillion on May 30th, 100,000 troops are in Afghanistan chasing an illusive target that has not made us safer in this country or closer to achieving peace and stability in Afghanistan. In poll after poll, the American people have repeatedly stated they want these wars to end. President Obama should honor the American people's wishes and end both wars and bring our troops home now."
AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW:

Gold Star Families Speak Out members whose loved ones died as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and Military Families Speak Out members who have a loved one who has previously served or is currently serving in Afghanistan or Iraq are available for interview over Memorial Day Weekend. To schedule an interview, contact Nikki Morse at nikki@mfso.org/347-703-0570 or Deborah Forter at deborah@mfso.org/617-983-0710.

ELSEWHERE IN THE COUNTRY: Members of Military Families Speak Out will also be participating in events around the country. To arrange for an interview, contact us at the information above.

Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) is a national organization of over 4,000 families who are opposed to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and have loved ones who serve or have served in the military since the fall of 2002. Gold Star Families Speak Out is a national chapter of MFSO with families whose loved ones died as a result of these wars.

For more information about Military Families Speak Out, please visit www.mfso.org
For more information about the chapter Gold Star Families Speak Out see www.gsfso.org




The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.




















thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends























Thursday, May 27, 2010

I Hate The War

The Iraq war is still being touted by Washington and the Pentagon as a war for progress and stability in the region. A study released May 26, however, reveals a radically different reality.
The Mercer Quality of Living survey ranked Baghdad last in a list of "most livable cities." The study took into account political, economic, ecological, social and cultural factors.


The above is from Derek Ford's "Study: Occupied Baghdad is least livable city on planet" (Party for Socialism and Liberation).

And it's the weekend right before Memorial Day. You seeing much in the way of Iraq War coverage? Any increase?

Nope. At The Nation, that 'brave' Greg Mitchell decided he had the energy (almost) to write a new intro to a 2003 column he republished there. [Added: For more on silly Greg, see Mike's "Greg Mitchell is an ass who needs to die."]

Oh, Greg, what a brave and strong man you are. Telling us, in 2010, about what happened in 2003. Covering that barely covered and little known Judy Miller era. Greg, you big, strong man, you. No one else has ever tackled that 'controversial' issue. No one else has ever weighed in. What a man, what a man.

Reality: It's just another way for Greg to continue his misogyny while avoiding the time required to actually educate himself about what's going on in Iraq today.

In the real world, an e-mail I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of came in to the public e-mail account today and Martha and Shirley passed it on. It's from a female who says she's 17 and she's concerned about the Iraq War in terms of the US leaves and everything goes to hell. She writes that she cares about the Iraqis and she worries about them and what will happen in August when all US forces pull out?

At the end of August, the White House hopes to have the number of US troops stationed in Iraq down to 50,000. Not zero.

It is confusing because the press keeps referring to this announced drawdown as a withdrawal. They care so little about the topic, don't be surprised that they can't get the terminology correct.

I don't doubt that the e-mailer cares and is sincere.

And on her fears? They're well grounded.

And I've never, ever lied here and said, "The US leaves and Iraqis have a group hug and all is wonderful."

Some have attempted to suggest that either with false claims or with silence. I don't play that game. It is likely -- and we have said this for years -- that violence will increase when the US leaves.

How long and to what extent no one knows.

But that's going to happen anyway.

It's going to happen if the US stays for two decades. It's going to happen if the US stays for two more weeks.

In November of 2004, "SHOULD THIS MARRIAGE BE SAVED?" appeared here. That is where I stood on the issue and where the community stands on it. This is a bad marriage, you cannot make it right. It was started for the wrong reasons and the healthy thing to do is to end it.

The relationship brings nothing for either partner. For the US, it destroys much more than national prosperity. For Iraq, it's consequences are much easier to see with the naked eye.

The current government or 'government' in Baghdad was set up by the US. It was propped up by the US.

If the press had done their job before Joe Biden became US Vice President, they could have prepared Americans for realities. Biden had many people -- right, left and center -- appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He chaired that committee back then. And there were serious conversations about Iraq. It was a strong committee with many outstanding members including a few Republicans. And serious topics were addressed including the goverment or 'government' in Baghdad and what happens if US troops end up being used to prop up that government in the midst of a bloody revolution in Iraq?

Because that can come. The people didn't pick their government. No Iraqi who had lived in Iraq all their lives would ever pick exiles to represent them. It wouldn't happen.

We wouldn't do it here. Bully Boy Bush came close to being a tyrant. (Barack seems determined to top him.) He didn't get that far but a number of people -- following the 2000 election (and Supreme Court gifting of the White House to Bush) and the 2004 election -- decided they no longer wanted to live in the US and they moved to Canada. (I am not talking about war resisters.)

If Canada, to stop Bush, had invaded and attempted to set up a new government, none of us would have gone along with the cowards who fled to Canada while we stayed and tried to fight back against Bush.

By the same token, Iraqis would not choose exiles who fled the country and lived in Europe and Syria for decades to become their leaders.

I loathe Nouri for a number of reasons. But even Ayad Allawi is an exile.

Iraqis have not been allowed to create their government.

That's one of the issues that may come up when the US leaves and the military's no longer able to keep Baghdad's government or 'government' in place.

The exiles fled out of fear. Some of it justified. And they returned, many of them, for vengeance. That's what they're seeking. It's what always motivates Nouri (as demonstrated by his own statements). So Iraq moves forward how? When leaders are always looking back and trying to even scores, the country moves forward how?

It is likely that after the US leaves, Iraqis may attempt to take control of their own country. They may or may not be successful in said attempt. (Moqtada al-Sadr has always been the one the US government has feared would lead such an attack. He might or he might not. But he's far from the only one capable of doing so. And if reports out of Basra currently are accurate, there's a new al-Sadr emerging.)

It is also likely that Nouri or a Nouri like person (US government analysis believes it would most likely happen under Nouri -- one more reason he shouldn't continue as prime minister), once the US leaves, will use the forces they control as prime minister to attack their various enemies. To kill them. The same way Saddam Hussein would have.

So that's two potential areas of violence within Iraq after the US leaves (whenever that might be). al Qaeda in Mespotomia came into being after the start of the Iraq War. For all the claims of 'foreign influnce!,' it remains a homegrown movement in Iraq. Should it attack (likely) after the US leaves, that would still be Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence.

Iran, whom the US fears, is not thought likely to attempt to influence Iraq by force. It's thought that the Arab neighbors wouldn't allow it and that Iran grasps that. (So Iran uses soft diplomatic pressure currently.) Iran might try to seize some land, claim they had a right to it. It might not.

But the serious threats to Iraq's stability remain internal groups, not external.

And the US efforts to cobble together leadership (among exiles and/or militias) ensured that would be the case. This was not a group of people coming together and deciding what kind of government they wanted and who they wanted to be represented by. It was imposed on them. And they have a right to reject it.

They may not. When the US leaves, they may not care or may care about other things. It could happen. Especially if the US keeps pouring all that money into Iraqi TV.

But the chances that Iraqis would rebel in some form against the US-imposed government do not decrease if the US stays there for decades. The chances only increase and the grudges grow.
I do understand the e-mailer's concerns and I hope she feels I've addressed them. But, to repeat, our position has always been that a US withdrawal could likely be followed by violence and that prolonging the occupation only increases the chance of violence. The US military is not trained for the job it's been forced to do. They're not trained for illegal war period but at the start of the war, one built around lies, the military was tasked with a goal they could do: Take control of Baghdad and run off the ruling government. They did that. After that, they've been expected to be couriers, security guards, constables and you name it. I'm sure that the bulk of US troops have attempted those roles with the best of intentions and some have been very successful in them. That doesn't change the fact that they're not trained for it. Nor does it change the fact that they're not appreciated by Iraqis in that role. In this country, we wouldn't appreciate the Canadian military doing similar tasks. You don't like a foreigner coming into your country, taking control and attempting to boss you around -- especially at gun point.

There is nothing that can be done by the US military in Iraq currently. There are a million reasons why the US military should never have gone to Iraq and why they should have already been pulled out. But there's also the reality that there's no role for a foreign military in Iraq today.



It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4397. Tonight? It remains -- no, it has reached 4400.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.




Iraq snapshot

Thursday, May 27, 2010.  Chaos and violence, post-election madness continues, Amnesty releases a new report on human rights abuses, Cindy Sheehan continues demanding peace, and more.
 
Starting with post-election madness. March 7th, Iraq finished Parliamentary elections. In the time since, Nouri al-Maliki has made clear he will have to be forced out of the prime minister post. This despite the fact that his slate (State Of The Law) came in second, behind Iraqiya (Ayad Allawi's political slate). In the many weeks -- nearly three months worth -- since, al-Maliki has thrown up one roadblock after another while attempting to discredit Iraqiya's win. He's demanded recounts and was granted a Baghdad recount. The recount found the original count to be accurate. Two Iraqiya candidates have been assassinated -- one immediately prior to the election, one earlier this week. Other Iraqiya candidates have been targeted by Nouri's government and had to go into hiding. Yesterday, Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) observed, "Iraq's Independent High Electoral Commission today submitted the final results of the March 7 election to the nation's Supreme Court, raising the possibility that the new parliament could be seated very soon, after two and a half months of legal challenges." But it's never that easy. Muhanad Mohammed, Waleed Ibrahim, Serena Chaudhryqa and Charles Dick (Reuters) report that the country's Supreme Court has issued a statement saying "that there are some legal issues that need clarification from IHEC" and "Amel al-Birqdar, deputy head of IHEC, said the matter concerned Furat Muhsin Saeed, a candidate in Basra province for the Iraqi National Alliance, a Shi'ite bloc with close ties to Iran." Alsumaria TV reports reports that the Kurdistan Alliance plans to head to Baghdad as soon as the results are ratified and that KA's Roz Nuri "Shawes stressed the necessity to implement Constitution article 140." Tariq Alhomayed (Asharq Alawsat Newspaper) notes:

Sayyed Ammar al-Hakim, leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, said that the alliance between the State of Law coalition and the National Iraqi Alliance is like a "permanent Muslim marriage." However Muslims can also divorce, which is the most abhorred halal [religiously permissible] act to God, and Muslims are also permitted to marry more than one wife, therefore the question is what kind of marriage are we seeing in Iraq? And is what Sayyed Ammar al-Hakim said realistic?
Firstly, what the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq said about a permanent relationship between the two Shiite allies does not seem realistic. This is based upon what Sayyed Ammar al-Hakim himself said during an interview that was published in our newspaper yesterday when answering a question on the Iranian pressure on the two major Shiite powers in Iraq to form an alliance. He said "it is no secret that the Islamic Republic, in its view of the scene and its complications, was perhaps in favor of these powers joining or converging, and this is an issue that cannot be denied, that there is a desire of this kind." Therefore what is happening in Iraq today is a strictly sectarian operation, and not a democratic operation or state-building. This is something that represents an exclusion, and not just of the Sunnis, but of all Iraqi components, and unfortunately all of this is taking place as a result of clear Iranian planning, and is being justified by some Iraqis.

And click here for the interview with Ammar al-Hakim (Ma'ad Fayad interviews him).
 
As Iraq continues "stumbling into false starts, fumbling around with false hopes, tumbling into false hearts, mainly mine" ("Make Me Feel Something," written by Carly Simon, originally appears on her Spoiled Girl album), the US doesn't have a whole lot to brag about.  On the Senate floor to a 'debate' -- if debates can last mere minutes -- took place as Barack Obama's war funding supplemental -- he swore no more supplementals in April of 2009 but he's not real good at keeping promises.  Senator Russ Feingold introduced an amendment -- co-sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin, Jeff Merkley, Sherrod Brown, Bernard Sanders, Robert Byrd and Tom Harkin -- calling for President Obama to "plan for safe, orderly, and expeditious redeployment of the United States Armed Forces from Afghanistan.  On the Senate floor, he declared:
 
This is not a timetable, a binding timetable. It really asks the president to give us a flexible vision, a timetable of when he would intend for this to be over.  And the senator from Michigan [Senator Carl Levin] tries to reassure us that the president has announced a start date for us to get out of Afghanistan. Well that doesn't really work because how do you feel the people in that area of the world would be reassured if we're only going to start withdrawing the troops in July of 2011? You can take one troop out.  That starts it. That's not a vision of when we intend to complete it. The senator suggests that somehow this sends the wrong message in the region.  Well actually the wrong message is that we intend to be there forever.  We don't intend to be there forever.  But you know what? After nine years, people start wondering.  Nine years.  Nine years. With no vision of when we might depart. In fact, I think the absolute worst message in the region is an open-ended committment. The worst thing we can do is not give some sense to the people of that region, to the American people and to our troops that there is some end to this thing.  And all we ask in this amendment is some vision from the president about when he thinks we might complete this task. So when this admendment is properly characterized.  It is actually a way to help us make sure that the Taliban and al Qaeda and others do not win the hearts and the minds of the Afghan people -- because they need to be reassured that we intend to make sure that their country comes back to them and that we will not occupy it indefinitely.
 
Feingold also noted his disappointment that "a bill providing tens of billions of dollars to keep this war going" was being proposed "with so little public debate about whether this approach makes any sense."  Senator Carl Levin responded by characterizing the amendment as one that "would reinforce fear" and stated that there is "already a deep seated fear in Afghanistan" that it would be abandoned by the US.  It was not a good moment for Levin and you half expected Russ Feingold to respond by breaking out into Annie Lennox's "Little Bird" ("They always said that you knew best, but this little bird's falling out of that nest . . .")  Instead, Feingold offered a response which included, "The senator suggests that somehow this sends the wrong message in the region. Well actually, the wrong message is that we intend to be there forever."
 
We're going to fall back to Tuesday for the following on numbers.  Journalists like to hide behind numbers and claim that numbers are objective and they don't lie. They may not lie but journalists damn well do decide what to emphasize and what to ignore. If you want an example of how that works, note this CBS News story by David Martin, this ABC news story by Jake Tapper, and we could go on and on but those are two of the better reporters and if that's what the best are doing . . . . Are they lying about the number of troops in Afghanistan? No, they're hiding behind that number (fed to them by the Pentagon, no reporter did the actual work on the numbers) and avoiding telling you about other numbers.               


The most important number this week, as noted in yesterday's snapshot, is 171. That's the number of US service members who have died in the Iraq War since Barack was sworn in as President of the United States. "We want to end the war! And we want to end it now!" He hollered that often as tent revivals causing damp panties for many men and women. Now? End the illegal war now? He's been in office 16 months and the Iraq War drags on. The 'peace' candidate took office 16 months ago and has not ended the Iraq War, has continued it and is responsible for those 171 deaths.      
 
Now the Pentagon didn't supply that number. But they supplied the number Tapper and Martin are quoting.  Why are we back to the numbers?  It's worth noting the death toll. It's worth noting the numbers Tapper and Martin dealt with Monday for another reason.  Here's Martin: "The Pentagon says there are now more U.S. troops in Afghanistan (94,000) than in Iraq (92,000), reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin."
 
Keep the 92,000 in mind.  Two years ago Alysha G wrote Yahoo! Answers: "How many people are in a combat brigade? I need to know for a presentation, for the persuasion of Obama." Best anser was: "They vary depending on what kind of brigade it is. Infantry brigades generally have around 3,500 soldiers and are commanded by Colonels. Armor brigades would have less soldiers."  We'll be generous and go with 4,000 per brigade.  The Pentagon just announced this week that there were 92,000 US troops in Iraq.  Yes, math is involved in this but we'll go slowly.  Scott Wilson (Washington Post) reports, "The sensitive departure is being managed by Vice President Biden, who says the U.S. military will reduce troop levels to 50,000 this summer, even if no new Iraqi government takes shape."             
 
Let's do the math slowly.  92,000 minus 50,000 is: 42,000.  Using 4,000 per brigade, that means there are 10.5 brigades to withdraw.  That might seem doable . . . if it weren't May 27th.  That leaves three months.  For Barack's promise to be met and the US forces to drop to 50,000 by the end of August, that means June will need to see 14,000 troops pulled from Iraq, July will need 14,000 and August will need 14,000.
 
Candidate Barack and his advisers insisted that one brigade a month was the magic number because it was doable without causing any strain (on the deploying functions within the military or on Iraq).  So from 4,000 a month to 14,000 a month? 
 
As we saw when Georgia's forces (the country, not the US state) departed, it is doable.  But so is an immediate departure of all US troops.  If Barack manages to keep this promise, the real win will be that it will underscore what so many -- including former Senator Mike Gravel and Governor Bill Richardson -- noted which was that the withdrawal could take place much more quickly than Barack was insisting it could.
 
Monday MP Bashar Mohammed Hamid al-Aqidi (with the Iraqiya slate) was assassinated and Tuesday he was buried. Amnesty International has issued the following:  
 
Amnesty International has called on the Iraqi authorities to investigate the killing of a politician in the northern city of Mosul on Monday.          

Bashar Mohammad Hamid al-'Agaidi, who was recently elected to the Iraqi parliament, was shot in the chest outside his home by armed men. His driver is also said to have been injured.             

"The Iraqi authorities must investigate this killing and bring those responsible to justice in conformity with international law and without recourse to the death penalty," said Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa programme.     

"More must be done to protect the hundreds of civilians who are being killed or injured in increasing attacks by armed groups, as the ongoing uncertainty over when a new Iraqi government will be formed continues."                

According to reports, one of the attackers has been arrested by the police.          

No group has so far said it carried out the attack.                  

Bashar Mohammad Hamid al-'Agaidi was elected to the Iraqi Parliament in the national elections held on 7 March 2010. He was a candidate for al-'Iraqiyya List, led by former prime minister Iyad 'Allawi, which won, narrowly, the largest number of seats but not an overall majority.                      
 
The elections did not produce any clear winner and the leading political parties have so far failed to agree on who should be forming the next government.             

This political and security vacuum is being exploited by armed groups fighting against Iraqi and US forces who have intensified their suicide bombing campaign.            

In the run-up to the elections and after, hundreds of civilians, including political activists, journalists, women and members of ethnic and religious minorities, have been killed by armed groups.                  

On 27 April 2010 Amnesty International issued Iraq: Civilians Under Fire, a detailed report focusing on the plight of civilians in Iraq.                                   

Read More

Iraq must protect civilians at risk of deadly violence (News, 27 April 2010)              
 
 
Today Amnesty issues "The State of the World's Human Rights" which is a survey of 159 countries on human rights whose overview notes of Iraq:
 
Government forces and armed political groups continued to commit gross human rights abuses, although the overall level of violence was lower than in previous years. Thousands of civilians were killed or seriously injured in suicide and other bomb attacks by armed political groups.  The government and the US-led Multinational Force (MNF) continued to hold thousands of uncharged detaineees on security grounds, some after several years, but released thousands of others. Torture and other ill-treatment of detainees by Iraqi forces, including prison guards, remained rife and were carried out with impunity. At least
1,100 prisoners were reported to be under sentence of death, many following unfair trials. The government disclosed no information about executions, but at least 120 were reported and it appeared that some were carried out in secret. At least 1.5 million people were still internally displaced within Iraq and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were refugees abroad.  New human rights violations were reported in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region where conditions generally were much better than in the rest of Iraq.
 
And we'll include this section on armed militias and detentions/imprisonments:
 
Armed political groups committed gross human rights abuses, including kidnapping, torture and murder.  Suicide bombings and other attacks targeted public places, apparently aiming to inflict civilian casualties.  Many attacks were mounted by al-Wa'ida in Iraq and by Sunni armed groups. Shi'a militia also committed abuses, including kidnapping, torture and murder. The victims included members of ethnic and religious minorities, journalists, women, gay men and other civilians.
At least 25 boys and men were killed in the first quarter of the year in Baghdad, apparently because they were or were perceived to be gay, after religious leaders in Baghdad's predominantly Shi'a district of al-Sadr City urged their followers to eradicate homosexuality. The perpetrators were believed to be armed Shi'a militia or members of the victims' own families or tribes. Many of the victims were kidnapped and tortured before they were murdered. Some had their bodies mutilated.
On 12 July, five Christian churches in Baghdad were bombed, killing four civilians and injuring at least 21 others.
On 13 August, at least 20 people were killed in a double suicide bombing in the town of Sinjar, a stronghold of followers of the Yazidi religion.
On 25 October, two suicide bombings killed at least 155 people in central Baghdad and injured more than 700. A truck bomb was detonated near the Ministries of Justice and Municipalities; minutes later a car bomb exploded outside the Baghdad Governorate building.  
On 1 January, the MNF was holding over 15,000 mostly uncharged detainess at Camp Cropper and other prisons.  This total was reduced to 6,466 by early December in accordance with the SOFA, which required that the MNF either release detainees or transfer them to Iraqi custody.  Some 7,499 detainees were released after a committee comprising representatives of several Iraqi ministries reviewed their cases and they had been interrogated by security officials. At least 1,1441 others, including some foreign nationals, were issued with arrest warrants or detention orders by Iraqi judicial authorities and transferred to Iraqi detention.
In September, the large MNF-run Camp Bucca prison near Um Qasr in southern Iraq was closed. Its inmates were released, transferred to Iraqi cutody or moved to the two remaining MNF prisons -- Camp Cropper, where most of the detained former high-ranking Ba'ath party members remained held; and Camp Taji, north of Baghdad.
On 8 April, a court in Baghdad's al-Karkh district ruled that there was insufficient evidence against Kadhum Ridha al-Sarraj and ordered his release.  However, he was not freed by the MNF until 7 October. He had been arrested on 15 September 2008 at Erbil international airport, handed to the MNF and detained without charge at Camp Cropper, apparently because his medical research led him to be suspected of bomb-making.
 
Violence continues in Iraq.  Will always continue throughout the illegal war and occupation.  May continue after the US leaves (and the US will leave at some point, maybe in a year, maybe in two, maybe in ten).  That's really an issue for the Iraqi people to sort out and they won't be able to do that while the US military props up 'leaders' who do not represent Iraq.  Among today's reported violence . . .  
 
Bombings?
 
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspaper) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which left six people wounded, another which left three wounded, a third which left four injured and a fourth which left two injured while a Mosul roadside bombing which wounded two Iraqi soldiers and a Mosul home bombing which left Saleh al-Hadeedi's wife wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul mortar rounds injured eleven people
 
Shootings?
 
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Khattab Awni (Ministry of the Interior's Inspector General office) was assassinated yesterday and that 2 guards were shot in Mosul Tuesday. Reuters adds 1 "police captain" was shot dead yesterday in Mosul. Reuters also notes 1 person shot dead in Mosul and that professor Abdul-Kareem Mohammed was shot dead in his Sharia College office in Baghdad.
 
 
Matthew Rothschild: These books -- I don't know much about your books, so I wanted to ask you and I'm embarrassed to say that I haven't read them because I usually try to read the books before the guest comes on.
 
Cindy Sheehan: Right, right.
 
Matthew Rothschild: Myth of America: The Ten Greatest Myths of the Robber Class or the 20 greatest myths. What's the biggest myth? Or what's one of the biggest myths?
 
Cindy Sheehan: Well I wrote 10 Greatest Myths last -- the beginning of last year after Obama was inaugurated and I saw the policies of the Bush administration continuing without much of an outcry from the so-called left. And so I started to think, "What makes us do that? What makes us -- every four to eight years -- believe in a system that is so corrupt and-and really cancerous no matter who's in charge of the system. And so I wrote that. I went on a forty book -- I mean a forty city book tour and I realized through the discussions I had in these towns that I really didn't hit the myths enough. And so then I came back last summer and wrote The 20 Greatest Myths of the Robber Class. And the myth I started out with is the foundational myth, I think, and that's that America's the greatest nation in the universe. Not on the planet, not in history, but in the universe. And so that makes us believe all the other myths because we, most good people, no matter if they're on the so-called right or the so-called left, we really believe that if our country does something wrong, it must have good intentions. And so that's not the case. And so I wrote the 20 myths. We have to expose the myths and dispell them and then I think we could have true change for the better in this country -- whether it's through, you know -- I call for a grassroots, very localized revolutions, you know -- and, of course, they're non-violent revolutions. But taking back our economy, taking back our government, taking back even our food systems. We have to do that if we truly want to have a more healthy -- not only a more healthy United States of America but a healthier world.
 
Matthew Rothschild: Cindy Sheehan, this foundational myth -- as you call this -- is really profound.  It's this myth of what I call "The American Superiority Complex."  
 
Cindy Sheehan: Yes, exactly.
 
Matthew Rothschild: And the idea, as you say, is that we don't -- everything we do, as you say, is because of good intentions or if we do something that isn't working out, it's because it's an accident.

Cindy Sheehan: Right, right.
 
Matthew Rothschild: Or it didn't work out the way that we expected.
 
Cindy Sheehan: It's an aberration.
 
Matthew Rothschild: Or a rouge operation!
 
Cindy Sheehan: Right.
 
Matthew Rothschild: Or something. Not that it's elemental to the way that US foreign policy operates.
 
Cindy Sheehan: Right.
 
Matthew Rothschild: How is that myth propagated?  How has it become so ingrained?
 
Cindy Sheehan: Oh my gosh, it's propagated through our schools, through our media, through our -- even, I talk about in my books, how Martin Luther King Jr. celebrations have turned militaristic. You know, where they roll tanks down the streets in the parade and they fly the Blue Angel planes overhead.  And I tell a story about when I was second grade and my second grade teacher asked us a question -- and this was back in, let me see, 1964.  They asked a question -- she asked us a question: "If a Communist came up to you and put a gun to your head and told you not to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, what would you do?"  So, of course, I raised my hand and I said I wouldn't recite it and I had to stand in the corner. So even when I was seven-years-old, I was being called unpatriotic, a traitor to this country.  So, yeah, I mean it's done through fear mongering, through Madison Avenue.  Distraction is a really good way to keep us not thinking about if  -- that our country is doing these crimes, these crimes against humanity. So there's just a lot of ways that this myth is propagated.  And the number one way it starts, it starts in the family.   
 
 
Cindy's Soapbox is a weekly radio program and her scheduled guest on the show that begins airing Sunday is former US Congress member and 2008 Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney.  We'll note another excerpt from Matthew Rothschild's interview with Cindy:
 
Matthew Rothschild: Why is Obama escalating the war in Afghanistan?
 
Cindy Sheehan: Well -- you know, that's a -- that's a very good question.  And he said he was going to do it when he was running for president.  I mean, that was one of his promises.  And so he's just fulfilling a campaign promise.  And you saw many anti-war, progressive activists that supported Obama saying: "Well that's one promise we hope he doesn't keep."  But he has kept that promise.

Matthew Rothschild: Were they just deluding themselves?  Or did they think, "Well it's worth it, no matter what."?
 
Cindy Sheehan: Uhm, I think it was -- And that's another question that I've been really investigating asking myself and trying to come to grips with: For eight years, did we have an anti-war movement or did we just have an anti-Bush movement? 
 
Matthew Rothschild: What's your answer to that?
 
Cindy Sheehan: I think we had an anti-Bush movement. I've been, like you said, still working really hard in the movement, in the peace movement, in the anti-war movement and in the alternative political movement, even when we have a new president.  And it is really, really hard to organize.  It's really hard to get people out in the streets anymore. There's such a lack of -- uhm -- intellectual honesty, I think, when it comes to this. A lack of integrity.  And so my whole -- my whole focus since Obama's come to power is to get us back to the realities of US policies and not personality. And I started to actually try that when George Bush was still president because I ran for Congress against Nancy Pelosi. She's supposedly the most liberal member of Congress from the most liberal district -- which, of course, are also two myths.  She's not -- well it depends upon how you define liberal. But you know, she's a politician, she's a centrist and the Democrats in San Francisco are centrists too.  So I started to try and pull people away from partisan politics to humanistic politics and it's just been very difficult. And so now these same people who fifteen, sixteen, eighteen months ago were saying "Well we have to support Obama because he's the peace candidate and he's better than McCain" are starting to say, "Oh, geez, I guess we better start organizing something because he really is fulfilling his promises." And not only is he increasing in Afghanistan, he hasn't fulfilled his promises for the withdrawal from Iraq and we have a nuclear option on the table still for Iran.
 
And for those who are not able to stream, Cindy then goes into ideas outlined in her article "Our Complex."  And while we're noting Cindy, we'll note this from Peace of the Action:
 
On July 4th, Peace of the Action will be beginning our Sizzlin' Summer Protests in Washington DC with a protest in front of the White House in Lafayette Square.
Starting at one o'clock in the afternoon, we will protest British Petroleum and its politicians and other friends in our government that led to the conditions that are causing perhaps the worst (and apparently unstoppable) environmental disaster in World History in the Gulf of Mexico.                          
On July 4th, Peace of the Action will be demanding that the Obama Administration penalize British  Petroleum in proportion to the devastation that it is causing.            
The money could go for:                    
  • Reparations to the people who are losing their livelihoods, homes, and natural beauty.                   
  • Clean-up.                
  • Wildlife rescue and refuge.                       
  • Investing in renewable, recyclable and sustainable forms of energy.         
Considering the highly unlikely probability of the U.S. government holding any corporation accountable, let alone an oil company  -- Peace of the Action believes that the answer for environmental sustainability and economic stability are in the hands of the people.      
If you can't come to DC on the 4th of July to help us protest BP, please consider holding a protest in front of your local BP gas station.              
This is just the first step, though. We need to become better citizens of this planet -- and instead of following the establishment's lines about reducing our dependence on "foreign" oil -- we must do everything to Declare Independence from all oil -- as evidenced by the Gusher in the Gulf -- all oil, foreign and domestic is harmful to the planet  -- and foreign oil is the reason for this country's addiction to war.         
Coming soon: Peace of the Action will have a Declaration of Oil Independence to sign, along with our demands, and these signatures will be delivered to the White House on the 6th of July -- the more the better.
In the meantime: do not purchase gas from BP gas stations, or ARCO AM/PM, which also sells BP gas.     
Also, try to do whatever is in your power to cut back on gas purchases -- if you never purchase gas, already -- then CONGRATULATIONS.
These are actions that cost us very little -- but if enough of us participate, we will have a profound affect on the future of life on this planet.