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: Bilow who wrote (116519)10/10/2003 7:18:21 PM
From: Sam  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
It doesn't matter which version of the following story is true. It is bad news for the US either way. Even if Sadr "only" has 10,000 followers, they can cause a lot of damage, provoke a backlash, and attract still more followers and people who dislike Americans.

But other than, there are lots of good stories to report. A death or two a day--well, what's that compared to democracy in Iraq, and a shining symbol on the hill for the Arab world. Never mind that Turkey is already a stable democracy whose "example" hasn't spread very far. I guess they've been stable for too long, and don't count.

Shiite Outrage Heightens Fears of Danger to Americans
By IAN FISHER

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 10 — Shiite anger against Americans spilled over into Friday prayers in Sadr City, the Baghdad slum where two Iraqis and two American soldiers were killed in separate incidents on Thursday. The violence and subsequent public outrage raised fears of new dangers to American forces in the form of angry followers of Muqtada al Sadr, a young anti-American cleric.

A throng of perhaps 10,000 gathered to pay their respects to the two Shiites they believe were killed by American forces the night before. "No, no, to America!" they chanted as wooden coffins holding the remains of the "martyrs" were paraded along a main street. The neighborhood of some two million people used to be called Saddam City but was renamed named in part after Mr. Sadr's father, a popular cleric who was assassinated in 1999, on Mr. Hussein's orders, many believe.

Sheik Abdul-Hadi al-Daraji, an aide to Mr. Sadr, delivered the sermon today and issued a defiant demand: that no American soldiers be allowed inside Sadr City.

"America, which calls itself the supporter of democracy, is nothing but a big terrorist organization that is leading the world with its terrorism and arrogance," he said.

For the last six months, the greatest threat to American soldiers has come from common criminals or people loyal to Saddam Hussein, who was from the Sunni sect of Islam, a minority in Iraq. The majority Shiites, repressed under Mr. Hussein, have been broadly more supportive and have rarely been thought responsible for attacks on American soldiers.

But on Thursday night — hours after a suicide bomber killed at least eight people at a police station several blocks away — a sustained firefight erupted between United States forces and followers of Mr. Sadr, a Shiite cleric who opposes the American occupation here but, so far, has counseled against violence.

A United States military spokesman said the violence erupted after an American patrol in Sadr City, a sprawling Shiite slum of about two million people, was lured into a "deliberate and planned ambush."

The soldiers faced an arsenal of weapons that included small arms and rocket-propelled grenades, as well as explosives, said the spokesman, Lt. Col. George Krivo.

Iraqi witnesses said the soldiers killed at least two men in the crowd — and some witnesses said the Americans fired first.

Colonel Krivo said that American troops would continue patrols in Sadr City and said he did not believe the incident on Thursday constituted the start of any widening confrontation.

"Let's not paint the whole area, or the whole two million-plus people who are living there, with the same brush," he said. "There are specific areas there that are challenging, just as there are specific areas throughout the country that are challenging. So be careful not to generalize too much about this area."

Still, a confrontation with Mr. Sadr, who is about 30 years old, and his followers, many of them poor young men without jobs, does not seem out of the question. American officials have long regarded him with concern, for his anti-American oratory, his close ties to radical clerics in Iran and his insistence on establishing an Islamic state in Iraq.

Perhaps the biggest concern is his militia, the Jaish al-Mahdi. Though the American authorities have banned militias, his followers have roamed the streets in the last two days carrying rifles (some, apparently, given to Iraqi police officers ny the Americans), grenades and even rocket-propelled grenades. At today's prayers, they acted as armed security guards, some planted on rooftops with machine guns. Not a single uniformed Iraqi police officer was in sight.

Despite the volume and visibility of Mr. Sadr's followers, there is some debate about his actual influence among Shiites, many of whom follow more moderate religious leaders. It is not hard to find people even in Sadr City who speak out openly against him.

"You put a badge on your chest and wrap a piece of green cloth on your head and you become the defender of the faith," said Sa'ad Khudair, owner of a barbershop. "It's not right. They are thugs."

Tensions between the American troops and Mr. Sadr's followers have been growing for the last several days. On Wednesday, 1,000 or more of his followers blocked off streets in front of the American headquarters in downtown Baghdad in a tense but largely peaceful demonstration demanding the release of another cleric allied with Mr. Sadr.

The cleric had been arrested, Colonel Krivo said, after guns and ammunition were found in his mosque.

But the spark appeared to be the suicide attack on Thursday morning at an Iraqi police station, in which a bomber crashed through a gate in an Oldsmobile and detonated a powerful bomb, killing at least eight other people.

Several hours later, United States soldiers surrounded Mr. Sadr's headquarters several blocks away. Local residents and clerics said that the soldiers had entered the headquarters and that several of them were beaten and had their guns taken away. Colonel Krivo said he was "not aware" of any such event.

Witnesses said that militia members then blocked off the street in front of the headquarters, and that about 8 p.m., three Humvees with Americans drove up to the blockade.

Accounts differ of what happened next. Colonel Krivo said that the soldiers arrived after several people requested "humanitarian assistance."

"There were some people that came out, met with the forces and said, `Please come in. We need to show you something important,' " the colonel said.

It was then that people in the crowd attacked, he said. In addition to the two soldiers killed, four were injured. Colonel Krivo said that a special unit was called to rescue them, sparking an exchange of fire that witnesses said lasted an hour or more.

"From our reports we believe this was a deliberate and planned ambush," he said. "This was not just a hasty act."

But many people in the neighborhood said it was the soldiers who had fired first.

"The Americans started shooting randomly," said Hassan Khadhim, 22, who owns a shop near the gunfight. "Mostly they were shooting in the air to frighten people. So our people shot back at them."

Some witnesses, however, agreed that it was an ambush.

"Muqtada's people were hiding behind the mural waiting for them," said Muhammad Kadhim, 31, a post office employee. "When the Americans came they started shooting at them and all the Americans were trying to do was just to leave."

The mural he referred to is huge and heroic billboard in a traffic circle painted with the faces of Mr. Sadr's father, Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, and Muhammad Baqr al-Sadr, an Islamist scholar and founder of the religious Dawa Party executed by Mr. Hussein in 1980. The two men were not immediately related. One of the two Iraqis killed was shot at the base of the mural, witnesses said.

Despite the proximity of the bombing and the later shootout, Colonel Krivo said there was no evidence to suggest they were linked in anyway, though he said he could not rule it out. Given the similarity to previous bombings, suspicion fell more immediately on pro-Hussein forces or foreign fighters who have come to Iraq to battle Americans, held generally responsible for much of the chaos in Iraq.

nytimes.com



To: Bilow who wrote (116519)10/11/2003 5:38:30 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 281500
 
America, Swept to War on a Lie
___________________________

by Gordon Barthos

Published on Thursday, October 9, 2003 by the Toronto Star

___________________________

President George Bush left no fear unstirred as he made the case for war with Iraq.

Saddam Hussein posed "a grave threat to peace," he told a Cincinnati audience five months before the Marines landed.

Saddam had "an arsenal of terror," Bush insisted. He "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons ... is seeking nuclear weapons...."

His schemes "threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons."

And Americans "cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud," Bush warned, sounding an apocalyptic note.

This alarmist indictment steeled Americans for a war that would take 8,500 Iraqi lives, cost close to $100 billion, and strain relations with most of the world.

Yet Bush now stands exposed as a spinner of untruths and half-truths, knowingly or not, as the public loses faith in his ability to manage foreign policy — a strength he hoped to parlay into re-election next year.

A majority of Americans now feel the country is on the wrong track, Bush is stumbling on foreign policy and the economy, and the Iraq war wasn't worth it.

Alarmed by this, Bush goes on the offensive today, with yet another major speech justifying the war. Only this time he faces an Everest of skepticism.

Little wonder. Never in modern times has a president peddled so many fictions to justify a "pre-emptive" war that need not have been fought.

Bush's own Iraq Survey Group — headed by David Kay, an American and former United Nations weapons inspector — has just spent three months scouring Iraq with 1,200 personnel, without validating any of the president's dramatic claims.

Yes, Saddam was a monstrous despot who sacrificed a million of his own people in wars and purges. He spent billions on weapons before the 1990 Gulf War, and was determined to preserve sufficient know-how to redevelop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, at some future date. Clandestine research continued into 2003, as he played cat-and-mouse with U.N. inspectors prior to the U.S. invasion.

But he had no horror weapons, and posed no threat.

And that makes a mockery of Bush's claim that the United Nations system let the world down, post-1990, by failing to contain Saddam.

In Cincinnati, Bush summed up the U.N.'s alleged failure in these words:

"After 11 years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he's moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon."

Not true. None of it.

The U.N. trusteeship had worked, hobbling Saddam, constraining his scientists and neutering his military.

And Kay had to grudgingly admit as much to the U.S. Congress this past week. Bush was either misled by his advisers about Saddam's arsenal, or so determined to topple him that the truth scarcely mattered.

"We have not yet found stocks of weapons," Kay reported.

"We have not yet been able to corroborate the existence of a mobile biological warfare production effort.

"Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled chemical warfare program after 1991." It was "reduced, if not entirely destroyed."

And "we have not uncovered evidence that Iraq undertook significant post-1998 steps to actually build nuclear weapons or produce fissile materiel."

This is a damning repudiation of Bush's central case for war.

It also validates U.N. diplomacy, sanctions, and inspections. The system Bush sneered at worked.

Bush's claims were "scandalous," sheer "spin and hype," former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix now says.

Fully 7 in 10 Canadians recognized that, and opposed the war, as did most of the world.

But 6 in 10 Americans gave their president the benefit of the doubt.

And rushed to war on a lie.

Copyright 1996-2003. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited.

commondreams.org