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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: MrLucky who wrote (13631)3/1/2006 12:42:45 PM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 541958
 
So, what is your opinion? Is there a civil war in Iraq today? Has the US media reported accurately in your judgement?

I don't know if it's appropriately characterized as a civil war or not. When anything changes over time, there is rarely a clear point where it stops being that and starts being this. I don't think that any of us has the information to pinpoint that switch. I doubt that even those who watch it carefully, which does not include me, could pinpoint it. At what point does one become old or become fat? At what point does violence involving a lot of factions become a civil war? Who knows? I doubt that the principals do, much less the media, and even less you and me. Usually in these matters there one day comes a realization. I figure that that realization came recently to some key people in the media and has spread. I don't know if it's accurate or not.

The media repeatedly uses the spin technique, "If you say it enough times, people will begin to believe it".

And I still don't know why it matters what people believe re the characterization of this violence or why anyone, including you, would care enough to spin it. If you spin something, you must think it's important that people believe it in a certain way. I don't know why you think the media would want people to believe the civil war characterization or why it's important to you that people believe some other unspecified (to the best of my recollection) characterization.



To: MrLucky who wrote (13631)3/8/2006 10:07:47 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541958
 
Saw this piece and thought of you.

"Expert on Iraq: 'We're In a Civil War'
U.S. Officials Deny Violence Has Risen to That Level, but ABC News Analysts See a 'Serious Lack of Realism'
By JAKE TAPPER

BAGHDAD, March 5, 2006 — - As Pentagon generals offered optimistic assessments that the sectarian violence in Iraq had dissipated this weekend, other military experts told ABC News that Sunni and Shiite groups in Iraq already are engaged in a civil war, and that the Iraqi government and U.S. military had better accept that fact and adapt accordingly.

"We're in a civil war now; it's just that not everybody's joined in," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William L. Nash, a former military commander in Bosnia-Herzegovina. "The failure to understand that the civil war is already taking place, just not necessarily at the maximum level, means that our counter measures are inadequate and therefore dangerous to our long-term interest.

"It's our failure to understand reality that has caused us to be late throughout this experience of the last three years in Iraq," added Nash, who is an ABC News consultant.

Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News, "If you talk to U.S. intelligence officers and military people privately, they'd say we've been involved in low level civil war with very slowly increasing intensity since the transfer of power in June 2004."

Since the elections last year, Cordesman says, more radical Islamist insurgents have made "a more dedicated strike at the fault lines between Shiites and Sunnis." And they have succeeded.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, however, U.S. Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disputed that.

"I think that the Iraqi people -- Kurds, Shia, Sunni -- walked up to the abyss, took the look in, didn't like what they saw, have pulled together, have pulled back from violence, and are working together to keep things calm and to find the right mix for their own government," Pace said.

Sectarian Violence Rages On

The sectarian violence over the weekend was lower in intensity than in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of the Askariya Mosque -- one of the holiest Shiite sites -- in Samarra on Feb. 22. But still, the sectarian violence continued.

On Saturday night, gunmen mowed down four people -- killing two of them -- at the Shiite Ahl al-Beit mosque in Kirkuk, North of Baghdad. On Sunday, at least two others were killed in a gun battle at the Sunni al-Noor mosque in the al-Jihad neighborhood of West Baghdad.

Shakir Mahmoud, a cleric at al-Noor mosque, claimed the attackers came from the Interior Ministry itself, which is controlled by Shiites and has been accused of allowing, if not permitting, Shiite militias.

"The group consisted of 10 cars, care used only by the Interior Ministry," Shakir said. "The uniforms are only worn by the Interior Ministry. They attacked the mosque."

The Interior Ministry denied the charge.

Al Qaeda at Work?

On Saturday in Doha, Qatar, the head of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid, claimed al-Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the Askariya Mosque, saying that the blast indicated the group was changing its goal and trying to start a civil war in Iraq. He allowed that it had worked, to an extent.

"They got more of a reaction from that than they had hoped for," Abizaid told the Associated Press. "I expect we'll see another attack in the near future on another symbol. They'll find some other place that's undefended, they'll strike it and they'll hope for more sectarian violence."

Abizaid also noted that the attack had achieved its intended affect to disrupt the formation of an Iraqi government, saying, "The shrine bombing exposed a lot of sectarian fissures that have been apparent for a while, but it was the first time I've seen it move in a direction that was unhelpful to the political process."

But while Abizaid offered a fairly glowing assessment of the performance of the Iraqi military and police, others noted that the body count hovered in the hundreds, if not surpassing a thousand, and that in some cases the largely Shiite forces had created problems as well.

'Serious Lack of Realism'

Nash told ABC News, "The vast majority of the personnel in the army come from the Shiite and the Kurd population. And what we need to understand is that a political settlement -- not brokered, but insisted upon by the U.S. -- that gives equitable treatment to all factions is what we need."

Cordesman, who is also an ABC News consultant, noted that when military leaders speak publicly, "They have to spin the issue -- particularly for American and European audiences -- and there's often a rather serious lack of realism."

Whether or not this is civil war, the fighting is not yet a broad national conflict, since an overwhelming majority of the attacks are in just four out of Iraq's 18 provinces. The question is whether it will spread.

Zoe Magee and Mazin Faiq in Baghdad, and Sam Brooks in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures"

abcnews.go.com



To: MrLucky who wrote (13631)3/8/2006 10:50:43 AM
From: Suma  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541958
 
I am not at my home but using a different computer. Just wanted to add here that friend who is film business had occasion to be with woman film maker.. an Iraqi who said that we are not getting the truth here. Further than 100.000 women and children have been killed in this war....

From the horses mouth and not media...I would think.