SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hawkmoon who wrote (103440)6/29/2003 1:20:54 PM
From: KonKilo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Hawk,

As a military man, what do you see next in Iraq? Do we continue taking casualties at the current rate and hope for the best, or do we try something different?

Iraq's resistance war was planned

Jason Burke, Baghdad
Sunday June 29, 2003
The Observer

The bodies of two missing American soldiers were found yesterday as news emerged that a growing campaign of Iraqi resistance to coalition occupation may have been planned before the war began.

Allied officials now believe that a document recently found in Iraq detailing an 'emergency plan' for looting and sabotage in the wake of an invasion is probably authentic. It was prepared by the Iraqi intelligence service in January and marked 'top secret'. It outlined 11 kinds of sabotage, including burning government offices, cutting power and communication lines and attacking water purification plants.

What gives the document particular credence is that it appears to match exactly the growing chaos and large number of guerrilla attacks on coalition soldiers, oil facilities and power plants.

At least 61 US troops have died in Iraq since major combat was declared to be over on 1 May, including at least 23 in attacks. The latest death came on Friday when a soldier was killed in an ambush, and another shot in the neck and critically injured. Grenades were thrown at a US convoy as it passed through the Thawra area, a poor, mainly Shia Muslim part of the capital that had been largely free of anti-American violence.

US officials dismiss their casualties as 'militarily insignificant' and point out that there are 55,000 US troops in Baghdad. But the repeated attacks damage the forces' image of invulnerability and lead to harsher security measures that risk alienating swaths of the population.

A series of major operations involving hundreds of arrests have apparently failed to quell the unrest, much of which is believed to be committed by criminals hired by wealthy former Baath Party officials. Some attacks are also sponsored, security offi cials believe, by hardline religious groups.

It is not known who was behind Friday's attack although the prime suspects are Sunni Muslims from the west of Baghdad, where resistance to the US has so far been strongest. It is possible that they chose to attack Americans in a Shia Muslim area to bolster the impression that Iraq's majority Shia population, who have hitherto been relatively supportive of the occupying forces, are joining the fight against the coalition.

The spiral of violence has also hit British troops after six military policeman were killed and eight other soldiers injured in the southern Iraqi town of Majar Kabir. Yesterday UK troops returned to the village where the men were killed after dropping leaflets promising that there would be no 'mass punishment'.

Military officials insisted they were not offering an amnesty to those who were responsible for the killings. 'The priority is to win back the hearts and minds of the people,' an Army spokesman said. 'But by doing that one of the benefits will be that hope fully we will be able to catch the people responsible. There is certainly no amnesty.'

There is still no explanation of why the RMP detachment was not assisted by the substantial British forces near by when it was surrounded by an angry mob. Sources within the RMP in the UK told The Observer they suspected that the detachment may have been short of ammunition. One soldier recently returned from Iraq said that a shortage had led to ammunition being taken from military policemen to give to frontline units.

'When I was in Kosovo we had to borrow ammo and grenades off the Para Regiment to feel as though we were suitably armed when isolated. Apparently we were "policemen not soldiers", so we weren't issued it,' one source said. 'I know from friends in the Gulf that they had had a lot of ammo withdrawn because of this attitude. It cost them their lives.'

British military officials dismissed the claims last night. 'The idea that we send anyone out without enough ammunition is simply rubbish,' one said.
observer.guardian.co.uk



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (103440)6/29/2003 2:02:34 PM
From: marcos  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Legalities under US law or US interpretation of international law will not cut it on Guantánamo - it was a gun to the head contract, signed under duress and therefore invalid ... in perpetuity for usd two thousands, geez get real, and who says cubanos want to lease it to anybody anyway, least of all an hostile foreign military

In terms of Realpolitik if you prefer - the cost/benefit is working against you, the hypocrisy evidenced by your behaviour outweighs considerably any strategic or tactical benefit you derive from occupying somebody else's harbour .... don't think we don't notice these things, we do, even on days we don't comment on them ... if you want a military base in the Caribe [when you've got Florida right there very few kilometres away], then negotiate for one in a free enterprise manner consistent with the ballyhooed rhetoric of your Cradle of Liberty

'And there are NO CUBANS living within Guantanamo boundaries'

Pretty funny that Hawk, place is occupied by an hostile military, got big steel fences around it, machine guns all over, dogs, frowns on guards with pistols ..... needs somebody with authority and guts to stand up and say in firm voice, i am a jelly doughnut, tear down that wall mister presidente, then you will see cubanos there, on what always was and will always be territorio cubano

'So what you recommend is that we don't engage in sanctions,'

The US as a state, you mean? - no definitely not ... name is tainted now, doesn't do any good anyway, look how many of your presidentes the old bugger has outlasted, what is it, ten now ... how many will it take, before you elect a bright one

' ... hostile language towards Castro, or make any other form of criticism..'

The US as a state, no, it does no good, only supports the old fart .... but as individuals, yes by all means ... best to do this in an effective and intelligent manner that stands a chance of decent cost/benefit though - got to be friendly, open, be a traveller not a tourist sheep .... listen a lot, preach a little when comes an opening, and not until, set an example as a free human being, make some friends .... get around - Castro wants to bottle you up in the gringolandias like Varadero, well push the limits always, say you want to check out that village in the sierra so gloriously famous from La Revolución, you'd like to stay there a few weeks please .... then you've got to check your stocks of course, and/or type at somebody, so could you please be directed to an internet connection, preferably with good food as a cybercafe .... and there is the crux of it - the net ... both symbol and promoter of freedom, the net

Meanwhile in between you're experiencing the sun, the warmth of the people, the dance, the theatre, the music ... the music is deadly, this is not a real hard thing to go through

Take little money, very little ... you're an old hippy traveller, remember, you don't have much money as you're not Donald Trump's son [even if you are] ... the less you spend travelling the more you experience anyway - stay in hostels and pensiones, not big hotels, eat what the people eat, and when you hear english, move on

Castro won't like you venturing out of the gringolandias, and he won't like you speaking your mind, but what can he do on either account, in the longer term? ... the economy is dependent on tourism, thusly on the first rule of free enterprise [nothing more free enterprise than tourism, people go where they choose] - 'find a need and fill it' ... ultimately the walls break down as the cost/benefit becomes evident to cubanos themselves ... what is he gonna do, arrest thousands of the very sort of cash-bringers on which the economy is built? ... well perhaps a few thousands, but wouldn't it make a fine story to tell your great grandchildren, eh

You wanna take Playa Girón, and hold it effectively this time? ... not so difficult, just come in inconspicuous numbers and hold your mouth right .... there's even good anchorage right there, and docks, if you'd really like some adventure .... we have family who fish the Caribe, they can get you great cigars wholesale, because there are cubanos fishing out there too, and more than a few passengers have passed back and forth [see, cubanos come to México to make money too, less money but an easier trip] .... lots of air connections too, from all over [except the US], no problem

'All the foriegners should just shut up'

Nope, you're not clear on the concept, maybe read again what i typed ...it's quite the opposite i'm proposing, that we stop shutting up, that we call it as it is - defy Uncle Sam where he's wrong, and defy Castro where he's wrong ... in a sensible manner with both of course, no advantage gained in suicide, but firmly and steadily, in the tradition of Thoreau .... there is a beautifully righteous symmetry in US nationals doing this, over and above those of any other nation, because they get to defy both the demented embargo, and the demented dictator ... so how about it