Category Archives: The Shrub War

Wesley Clark In The Washington Post: Fallujah Is Just The Beginning: What This War Lacks Is Any Real Diplomacy

Wesley Clark has been chiming in a lot lately on the Shrub War situation. I think he’s a smart guy with a lot of experience in this War stuff, so I’ve created a category for him.
I’m not trying to archive everything the guy does or anything, but once I’ve posted a couple things from the same person (as I am about to- I’ve got some good clips of him from Bill Maher’s show a few weeks back), it will make it easier to find the stuff later if it has its own category.

The Real Battle

Winning in Fallujah Is Just the Beginning
By Wesley K. Clark for The Washington Post.

Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assures us that U.S. and Iraqi government forces have moved steadily through the insurgent stronghold and that the assault has been “very, very successful.” Last night, even as troops fought to secure the final section of the Sunni city, senior Iraqi officials declared it “liberated.” But it’s hardly surprising that the measure of success in Fallujah is elusive: There’s no uniformed enemy force, no headquarters, no central command complex for the troops to occupy and win. At the end, there will be no surrender.
After “winning”: Tactical victory is one thing, strategic victory another. U.S. Marines regroup inside the Khulafah Rashid mosque in Fallujah after taking it Thursday. They left later after routed insurgents regrouped and fired on the mosque. (Luis Sinco — Los Angeles Times Via AP)
Instead, the outcome of the battle must be judged by a less clear-cut standard: not by the seizure and occupation of ground, but by the impact it has on the political and diplomatic process in Iraq. Its chances for success in that area are highly uncertain. Will Fallujah, like the famous Vietnam village, be the place we destroyed in order to save it? Will the bulk of the insurgents simply scatter to other Iraqi cities? Will we win a tactical victory only to fail in our strategic goal of convincing Iraqis that we are making their country safe for democracy — and specifically for the elections scheduled for the end of January?…
But in what sense is this “winning?”
To win means not just to occupy the city, but to do so in a way that knocks the local opponent permanently out of the fight, demoralizes broader resistance, and builds legitimacy for U.S. aims, methods and allies. Seen this way, the battle for Fallujah is not just a matter of shooting. It is part of a larger bargaining process that has included negotiations, threats and staged preparations to pressure insurgent groups into preemptive surrender, to deprive them of popular tolerance and support, and to demonstrate to the Iraqi people and to others that force was used only as a last resort in order to gain increased legitimacy for the interim Iraqi government.
Even the use of force required a further calculus. Had we relentlessly destroyed the city and killed large numbers of innocent civilians, or suffered crippling losses in the fighting, we most certainly would have been judged “losers.” And if we can’t hold on and prevent the insurgents from infiltrating back in — as has now occurred in the recently “liberated” city of Samarra — we also shall have lost…
This insurgency has continued to grow, despite U.S. military effectiveness on the ground. While Saddam Hussein’s security forces may have always had a plan to resist the occupation, it was the failure of American policymakers to gain political legitimacy that enabled the insurgency to grow. And while the failure may have begun with the inability to impose order after Saddam’s ouster, it was the lack of a political coterie and the tools of political development — such as the Vietnam program of Civil Operations-Revolutionary Development Support (CORDS) — that seems to have enabled the insurgency to take root amid the U.S. presence. These are the sorts of mistakes the United States must avoid in the future, otherwise the battle of Fallujah may end up being nothing more than the “taking down” of an insurgent stronghold — a battlefield success on the road to strategic failure.
Troops are in Fallujah because of a political failure: Large numbers of Sunnis either wouldn’t, or couldn’t, participate in the political process and the coming elections. Greater security in Fallujah may move citizens (whenever they return) to take part in the voting; it’s too early to say. But it’s certain that you can’t bomb people into the polling booths.
We should be under no illusions: This is not so much a war as it is an effort to birth a nation. It is past time for the administration to undertake diplomatic efforts in the region and political efforts inside Iraq that are worthy of the risks and burdens born by our men and women in uniform. No one knows better than they do: You cannot win in Iraq simply by killing the opponent. Much as we honor our troops and pray for their well-being, if diplomacy fails, their sacrifices and even their successes in Fallujah won’t be enough.

Continue reading

Military Hospitals Prepare For Vietnam-Like Casualties From Fallujah Assault

This is from November 5, 2004.

Military hospital preparing for Fallujah battle

Marines say the toll is expected to rival those seen in Vietnam War
By Tom Lasseter for Knight Ridder Tribune News.

The number of dead and wounded from the expected battle to retake insurgent-controlled Fallujah probably will reach levels not seen since Vietnam, a senior surgeon at the Marine camp outside Fallujah said Thursday.
Navy Cmdr. Lach Noyes said the camp’s hospital is preparing to handle 25 severely injured soldiers a day, not counting walking wounded and the dead.
The hospital has added two operating rooms, doubled its supplies, added a mortuary and stocked up on blood reserves. Doctors have set up a system of ambulance vehicles that will rush to the camp’s gate to receive the dead and wounded so units can return to battle quickly…
More than 1,120 U.S. soldiers and Marines have died in Iraq since the war began.
The deadliest month was April, when fierce fighting killed 126 U.S. troops, largely at Fallujah and Ramadi, before a cease-fire virtually turned Fallujah over to the insurgents.
Even then, the death toll was far below the worst month of Vietnam, April 1969, when the U.S. death toll was 543 at the height of American involvement there.
The toll in human suffering has already been grave.

Continue reading

Me On BBC Radio From April 2003

I was interviewed by BBC’s Maggie Shiels in April 2003 about being a peace blogger, amidst all of the “War Bloggers.” She had no way of telling me at the time when the piece was going to air, but she did give me a clip that I could play for my parents — but I couldn’t publish it on my blog or anything.
Well, now that so much time has passed, I wrote to see if it was OK, and she said it was.

Here it is
. (Real File)
(Here’s a link to its directory if you need that for some reason.)
Also interviewed are UC Berkeley School of Journalism Professor Paul Grabowitz and blogger Chris Perillo. (Will somebody let them know about this for me? I don’t have their emails.)
That’s me reading from Salam Pax’s weblog too.
The story is about bloggers taking over as reliable sources of news.

Colin Admits We’re Losing The Shrub War

Hey Colin! You’ve got one more day to save face and come clean with us. Just say you’re sorry, and that you were just hanging out to try to keep things from getting crazy and out of control, but they just got crazy and out of control anyway, and now your just real sorry and you’re not going to cover for this guy anymore.
Say it before the election, and we just might forgive you.
(Though, it’ll still be tough.)
Anyway, here’s the latest story where “Colin privately tells “X” how he really feels.” It’s only a couple paragraphs long:

Colin Powell believes U.S. is losing Iraq war
Secretary of State Colin Powell has privately confided to friends in recent weeks that the Iraqi insurgents are winning the war, according to Newsweek. The insurgents have succeeded in infiltrating Iraqi forces “from top to bottom,” a senior Iraqi official tells Newsweek in tomorrow�s issue of the magazine, “from decision making to the lower levels.”
This is a particularly troubling development for the U.S. military, as it prepares to launch an all-out assault on the insurgent strongholds of Fallujah and Ramadi, since U.S. Marines were counting on the newly trained Iraqi forces to assist in the assault. Newsweek reports that “American military trainers have been frantically trying to assemble sufficient Iraqi troops” to fight alongside them and that they are “praying that the soldiers perform better than last April, when two battalions of poorly trained Iraqi Army soldiers refused to fight.”
If the Fallujah offensive fails, Newsweek grimly predicts, “then the American president will find himself in a deepening quagmire on Inauguration Day.”
— David Talbot, Salon.

Daily Show Comedy Clips From October 19, 2004

This is from the October 19, 2004 program.

Daily Show Comedy Clips From October 19, 2004


Mirror of these clips

(Thanks to Internet Veterans For Truth)
Included in these (2) clips:
Lewis Black on how the Shrub Administration continually wastes our tax dollars on extravagant purchases in the name of Homeland Security and $500,000 parties for the TSA.
The opening bit from 10-19-04
Messopotamia
Iraqi tourism board
Soldiers who refused to go on “suicide mission”
Bush saying that we will “not have an all volunteer army” and then being corrected by someone in the crowd.

The Daily Show
(The best news on television.)

Frontline: Rumsfeld’s War and The Choice 2004, And 60 Minutes On Patrick Miller, REAL Jessica Lynch Hero – previously: “All The Video Is Uploaded, But My Server Is Hosed”

Okay, so I’m having trouble posting because of all the traffic on the server — which is GOOD, I suppose, except that it’s making it hard for me to post.
(Don’t worry! The video should play back fine, we bought a larger pipe this week just for the occasion.)
So I’m just going to fight to get this post up for a while, with links to the directories of everything. And then I’ll try to get the posts up one by one later today.

Frontline: Rumsfeld’s War

(How Rumsfeld used the poor tactics that screwed up the military in Vietnam to screw up the military in Iraq. Really, except for, of course, the innocent people of Iraq who were killed/tortured by some of our troops, the rest of our troops are in the process of being screwed over worse than anybody right now.)

Frontline: The Choice 2004

(This chronicles the lives of Kerry and the Shrub from Yale on.)

Patrick Miller On 60 Minutes

The real hero of the Jessica Lynch story, and how the Shrub Administration actually covered up his heroism in order to peddle their false story about Jessica Lynch’s rescue.

Jon Stewart Nails Cheney In An Outright Lie

This is from the June 21, 2004 program.
Stewart: “Mr. Vice President, I have to inform you: You’re pants are on fire.”
Cheney said he never stated that it was “pretty well confirmed” that meetings had taken place between Saddam’s Officials and Al Queda members. The Daily Show dug up the Meet the Press coverage from December 9, 2001 that proves otherwise.
As a blogger and “traditional” journalist, I always hesitate to throw the word “lie” around unless I can validate my statement. How wonderful that we live in an age where I can present my case and back it up with evidence all on one interactive medium (for those that have quicktime, anyway…)
I also had the luxury of having the Daily Show With Jon Stewart to do my homework for me.
Here’s the Complete Video Clip of the contradicting statements as presented within this larger daily show clip. (The larger clip also contains footage of the Shrub and Rummy making excuses for their past inaccurate statements.)
Here’sa tiny clip of Cheney denying he ever said the meeting was “pretty well confirmed.
(Source: CNBC)
CNBC: “You have said in the past that it was quote “pretty well confirmed.”
Cheney: “No, I never said that. Never said that. Absolutely not.”
Here’s a little clip of the Meet the Press footage
where he clearly did say just that such a meeting was “pretty well confirmed.”
(Source: Meet The Press, December 9, 2001)
Cheney: “It’s been pretty well confirmed, that he didn’t go to Prague and he did meet with a Senior Official of the Iraqi Intelligence service.”

The Daily Show
(The best news on television.)

Daily Show On “The Connection”

This is from the June 21, 2004 program.
These should be up by 1pm CA time today. (Uploading now.) I’ve got to run.
Here’s the interview with Stephen F. Hayes, the guy who wrote The Connection, the new book claiming that there’s a connection between 911 and Saddam.
Turns out that his book is based on a single report by none other than Douglas Feith — the Shrub’s Undersecretary of defense, and one of the most notorious members within the Administration known for helping companies he used to work for to cash in on the Iraqi Gold Rush. (See the Bill Moyers Story all about it.

Bill Moyers On The Insider Business Deals Between Shrub Administration Officials And Iraqi Reconstruction Companies
Specifically, between Douglas Feith, the Undersecretary of Defense and several companies (many related to his “former” business associate Marc Zell), including: Zell, Goldberg and Company, Diligence, New Bridge Strategies, Barber, Griffith and Rogers, SAIC (courtesy of current Shrub Administration Official and former SAIC Senior Vice President Ryan Henry), and The Iraqi International Law Group.

Anyway,
Here’s the interview in two parts
.

The Daily Show
(The best news on television.)

Bill Moyers On Relevance Of Shrub Administration’s Policy Of Rejecting The Geneva Convention

Michael Isikoff discovered
this Shrub Administration memo
which outlines a policy of rejecting the Geneva Convention for War On Terror prisoners.
Here’s the Newsweek story that got this all started:

Double Standard?
.
This is a big deal guys, and Bill Moyers and Brian Brancaccio do their usual great job of explaining exactly why — and within a historical context. Then Brian interviews Columbia Law School Professor Scott Horton about the frighting implications of this policy.
This is from the May 21, 2004 program of Bill Moyers Now.
Want to mirror these clips?? Let me know! (
Mirror 1
of the complete version.)
This first clip provides details of the memo and some historical context:

Moyers On The Shrub’s Geneva-Rejection Policy – Part 1 of 3
(Small – 10 MB)
These next two clips contain an interview with Scott Horton where he analyses the Shrub’s justifaction for a Geneva Convention “double standard”:

Moyers On The Shrub’s Geneva-Rejection Policy – Part 2 of 3

(Small – 14 MB)

Moyers On The Shrub’s Geneva-Rejection Policy – Part 3 of 3

(Small – 14 MB)

Here’s the whole thing in a huge 37 MB file

David Brancaccio talks to Scott Horton, President of the International League for Human Rights. Horton will discuss the legal basis for the global war on terror and the U.S. government classified memo that puts forth what NEWSWEEK described as “a legal framework to justify a secret system of detention and interrogation that sidesteps the historical safeguards of the Geneva Convention.” Mr. Horton also recently spearheaded a Bar Association of New York report: “
Human rights standards applicable to the United States’ interrogation of detainees
.”

More about Scott from his website:

Mr. Horton has been a lifelong activist in the human rights area, having served as counsel to Andrei Sakharov, Elena Bonner, Sergei Kovalev and other leaders of the Russian human rights and democracy movements for over twenty years and having worked with the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights and the International League for Human Rights, among other organizations. He is currently president of the International League and a director of the Moscow-based Andrei Sakharov Foundation. Mr. Horton is also an advisor of the Open Society Institute’s Central Eurasia Project, and a director of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, the Council on Foreign Relations’s Center for Preventive Action and numerous other NGO organizations.
Mr. Horton is an adjunct professor at the Columbia University School of Law and the author of over 200 articles and monographs on legal developments in nations in transition.