WORL WIDE PROTESTS
Spiegel: Weltweiter Protest
Hamburg - Mehrere Tausend Kriegsgegner blockierten zeitweise das Oberkommando der US-Streitkräfte für Europa in Stuttgart. In Berlin marschierten rund 55.000 Demonstranten zur Siegessäule. Bei der zentralen Kundgebung in Berlin sagte DGB-Chef Michael Sommer: "Es ist eine Schande, dass ein angeblich religiöser Mensch, der doch George Bush sein will, die Nächstenliebe mit Füßen tritt und den Tod unschuldiger Menschen im Irak in Kauf nimmt."
Saturday, March 29, 2003
WAR ON IRAK: PROPAGANDA WATCH
BBC: US-UK Military War Misinformation Said "Worst Ever' - BBC
BBC news chiefs have met to discuss the increasing problem of misinformation coming out of Iraq as staff concern grows at the series of premature claims and counter claims by military sources.
As a result the corporation has reinforced the message to correspondents that they must clearly attribute information to the military when it has not been backed up by another source.
"There's been a discussion about attribution and it's been reinforced with people that we do have to attribute military information," said a BBC spokeswoman.
"We have to be very careful in the midst of a conflict like this one to be very sure when we're reporting something we've not seen with our own eyes that we attribute it," she added.
On nearly every day of the war so far there have been reports that could be seen as favourable to coalition forces, which have later turned out to be inaccurate.
Earlier this week there was confusion over whether there had been an uprising in the key southern city of Basra. A British forces spokesman, Group Captain Al Lockwood, said on Thursday there had been a "popular uprising", but this was denied by Iraqi authorities.
By last Sunday the southern Iraqi seaport of Umm Qasr had been reported "taken" nine times, while reports of the discovery of a chemical weapons factory in An Najaf have not been confirmed - just two more examples of the confusion over what is coming out of military sources.
"We're absolutely sick and tired of putting things out and finding they're not true. The misinformation in this war is far and away worse than any conflict I've covered, including the first Gulf war and Kosovo," said a senior BBC news source.
BBC: US-UK Military War Misinformation Said "Worst Ever' - BBC
BBC news chiefs have met to discuss the increasing problem of misinformation coming out of Iraq as staff concern grows at the series of premature claims and counter claims by military sources.
As a result the corporation has reinforced the message to correspondents that they must clearly attribute information to the military when it has not been backed up by another source.
"There's been a discussion about attribution and it's been reinforced with people that we do have to attribute military information," said a BBC spokeswoman.
"We have to be very careful in the midst of a conflict like this one to be very sure when we're reporting something we've not seen with our own eyes that we attribute it," she added.
On nearly every day of the war so far there have been reports that could be seen as favourable to coalition forces, which have later turned out to be inaccurate.
Earlier this week there was confusion over whether there had been an uprising in the key southern city of Basra. A British forces spokesman, Group Captain Al Lockwood, said on Thursday there had been a "popular uprising", but this was denied by Iraqi authorities.
By last Sunday the southern Iraqi seaport of Umm Qasr had been reported "taken" nine times, while reports of the discovery of a chemical weapons factory in An Najaf have not been confirmed - just two more examples of the confusion over what is coming out of military sources.
"We're absolutely sick and tired of putting things out and finding they're not true. The misinformation in this war is far and away worse than any conflict I've covered, including the first Gulf war and Kosovo," said a senior BBC news source.
WAR ON IRAK
Asia Times: The 'Palestinization' of Iraq
AMMAN - American tanks are now ripping at the heart of Mesopotamia, the "land between the rivers" and the cradle of civilization; the US 5th Corps is already engaging the Medina division of the Republican Guards as B52s increase their bombing raids of the "red line" in the outer ring of defenses of Baghdad, over which hangs a surreal, dust-induced dark orange cloud.
For 280 million Arabs, the symbolic effect of the tanks in the country is as devastating as a lethal sandstorm. But Saddam Hussein seems to be one step ahead. It doesn't matter that Iraqi TV was silenced by a showering of Tomahawks (although domestic broadcasts, as well as the international signal, have been restored). Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi TV will be on hand to record the ultimate image that Saddam knows is capable of igniting the Arab world into an ocean of fire: an American tank in the streets of Baghdad juxtaposed with an American tank in the streets of Gaza.
To date, an estimated 5,200 Iraqis have crossed the Jordanian-Iraqi border, going back "to defend their homeland" as they invariably put it. In already one week of a war that was marketed by the Pentagon as "clean" and "quick" and which is revealing itself to be bloody and protracted, not a single Iraqi refugee has crossed the al-Karama border point into eastern Jordan.
Beyond Iraq, the most crucial development in the Middle East for decades is the fact that from Amman to Cairo, from Beirut to Riyadh, the bulk of the Arab nation is now "Palestinized". Marwan Muasher, the suave Jordanian foreign minister, insists that King Abdullah and his government are doing everything to end the war and "to try to help the Iraqi people" - basically through frantic telephone diplomacy with Bahrain, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The Arab League has meekly called for an end to the war. Washington didn't even register it. And the Arab street is not buying excuses any more.
The widespread anger directed at Arab leaders is overwhelming - from taxi drivers to art students, from construction workers to businessmen. For around half a century, the anger in a way channeled by the Palestinians - who by practical experience have learned not to trust Arab leaders. Now the loss of legitimacy is total - a long decaying process that originated in the early 1990s. The street knows that all Arab regimes - from reactionary Saudi Arabia to relatively progressive Jordan - have failed. They have been incapable of achieving Arab unity and independence. They have been incapable of providing social, economic and technological development. They have been impotent in their promises to try to help liberate Gaza and the West Bank. And they have been shamefully incapable of uniting against what their populations unanimously consider a neocolonialist war in Iraq.
One of the most extraordinary developments of the war so far is how the resistance of the Iraqi population against a foreign invasion has galvanized this sentiment of anger in the Arab world. "We are all Palestinians now," as a Bedouin taxi driver puts it. One of the first things anyone mentions in Jordan - be it a Jordanian, an Egyptian, a Lebanese or a Somali refugee - is their happiness about the way the Iraqi people are resisting the "invaders" (never qualified as "liberators"). Their intuition also tells them that every extra day in this war is further humiliation to the Pentagon - especially because the real war, and not the US version, is being followed by the whole Arab world, in Arabic, through Arab satellite channels.
In a cramped office in downtown Amman near the Roman amphitheater, answering dozens of phone calls, surfing the Internet and zapping incessantly between al-Jazeera and CNN, a Jordanian intelligence source muses on how the Americans will play the war. "They are going to encircle the big cities, Basra, Mosul and Baghdad. But the elite Republican Guard divisions are digging in. The Americans will be forced to attack the best Iraqi soldiers, and thousands, dozens of thousands are now inside Baghdad. The Americans can't occupy Baghdad, they don't have enough soldiers, the city has more people than the whole of Lebanon. They could stay outside and keep bombing. But for how long? They cannot afford a war lasting many months. They will go crazy."
Asia Times: The 'Palestinization' of Iraq
AMMAN - American tanks are now ripping at the heart of Mesopotamia, the "land between the rivers" and the cradle of civilization; the US 5th Corps is already engaging the Medina division of the Republican Guards as B52s increase their bombing raids of the "red line" in the outer ring of defenses of Baghdad, over which hangs a surreal, dust-induced dark orange cloud.
For 280 million Arabs, the symbolic effect of the tanks in the country is as devastating as a lethal sandstorm. But Saddam Hussein seems to be one step ahead. It doesn't matter that Iraqi TV was silenced by a showering of Tomahawks (although domestic broadcasts, as well as the international signal, have been restored). Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi TV will be on hand to record the ultimate image that Saddam knows is capable of igniting the Arab world into an ocean of fire: an American tank in the streets of Baghdad juxtaposed with an American tank in the streets of Gaza.
To date, an estimated 5,200 Iraqis have crossed the Jordanian-Iraqi border, going back "to defend their homeland" as they invariably put it. In already one week of a war that was marketed by the Pentagon as "clean" and "quick" and which is revealing itself to be bloody and protracted, not a single Iraqi refugee has crossed the al-Karama border point into eastern Jordan.
Beyond Iraq, the most crucial development in the Middle East for decades is the fact that from Amman to Cairo, from Beirut to Riyadh, the bulk of the Arab nation is now "Palestinized". Marwan Muasher, the suave Jordanian foreign minister, insists that King Abdullah and his government are doing everything to end the war and "to try to help the Iraqi people" - basically through frantic telephone diplomacy with Bahrain, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The Arab League has meekly called for an end to the war. Washington didn't even register it. And the Arab street is not buying excuses any more.
The widespread anger directed at Arab leaders is overwhelming - from taxi drivers to art students, from construction workers to businessmen. For around half a century, the anger in a way channeled by the Palestinians - who by practical experience have learned not to trust Arab leaders. Now the loss of legitimacy is total - a long decaying process that originated in the early 1990s. The street knows that all Arab regimes - from reactionary Saudi Arabia to relatively progressive Jordan - have failed. They have been incapable of achieving Arab unity and independence. They have been incapable of providing social, economic and technological development. They have been impotent in their promises to try to help liberate Gaza and the West Bank. And they have been shamefully incapable of uniting against what their populations unanimously consider a neocolonialist war in Iraq.
One of the most extraordinary developments of the war so far is how the resistance of the Iraqi population against a foreign invasion has galvanized this sentiment of anger in the Arab world. "We are all Palestinians now," as a Bedouin taxi driver puts it. One of the first things anyone mentions in Jordan - be it a Jordanian, an Egyptian, a Lebanese or a Somali refugee - is their happiness about the way the Iraqi people are resisting the "invaders" (never qualified as "liberators"). Their intuition also tells them that every extra day in this war is further humiliation to the Pentagon - especially because the real war, and not the US version, is being followed by the whole Arab world, in Arabic, through Arab satellite channels.
In a cramped office in downtown Amman near the Roman amphitheater, answering dozens of phone calls, surfing the Internet and zapping incessantly between al-Jazeera and CNN, a Jordanian intelligence source muses on how the Americans will play the war. "They are going to encircle the big cities, Basra, Mosul and Baghdad. But the elite Republican Guard divisions are digging in. The Americans will be forced to attack the best Iraqi soldiers, and thousands, dozens of thousands are now inside Baghdad. The Americans can't occupy Baghdad, they don't have enough soldiers, the city has more people than the whole of Lebanon. They could stay outside and keep bombing. But for how long? They cannot afford a war lasting many months. They will go crazy."
WAR ON IRAK
CNN: Car bomb kills four U.S. soldiers
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Four U.S. soldiers with the Army's 3rd Infantry Division were killed Saturday morning when suicide bombers attacked a military checkpoint in the central Iraqi town of Najaf, a U.S. Central Command spokesman said.
CNN: Car bomb kills four U.S. soldiers
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Four U.S. soldiers with the Army's 3rd Infantry Division were killed Saturday morning when suicide bombers attacked a military checkpoint in the central Iraqi town of Najaf, a U.S. Central Command spokesman said.
WAR ON IRAK ANALYSIS
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - a week of war
March 28, 2003, 1448hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - According to the latest intercepted radio communications, the command of the coalition group of forces near Karabela requested at least 12 more hours to get ready to storm the town. This delay is due to the much heavier losses sustained by the coalition troops during the sand storms then was originally believed. Just the US 3rd Mechanized Infantry Division sustained more than 200 disabled combat vehicles of various types. The 101st Airborne Division reported some 70 helicopters as being disabled. Additionally, the recently delivered reinforcements require rest and time to prepare for combat.
At the same time the US forces have resumed attacks near An-Nasiriya and An-Najaf since 0630hrs and are continuously increasing the intensity of these attacks. During the night and early morning of March 28 the Iraqi positions in these areas were subjected to eight aerial assaults by bombers and ground attack aircraft. However, so far [the coalition] was unable to penetrate the Iraqi defenses.
Also during the early morning the British units begun advancing along the Fao peninsula. Latest radio intercepts from this area show that under a continuous artillery and aerial bombardment the Iraqis have begun to gradually withdraw their forces toward Basra.
First firefights between troops of the US 82nd Airborne Division and the Iraqi forces occurred in northern Iraq in the area of Mosula. At the same time the arrival of up to 1,500 Kurdish troops has been observed in this area. So far it is not clear to which of the many Kurdish political movements these troops belong. Leaders of the largest Kurdish workers party categorically denied participation of their troops. They believe that these may be units of one of the local tribes not controlled by the central authorities of the Kurdish autonomy and "ready to fight with anyone" for money.
According to verified information, during the past 48 hours of the Iraqi counterattacks the coalition forces sustained the following losses: up to 30 killed, over 110 wounded and 20 missing in action; up to 30 combat vehicles lost or disabled, including at least 8 tanks and 2 self-propelled artillery systems, 2 helicopters and 2 unmanned aerial vehicles were lost in combat. Iraqi losses are around 300 killed, up to 800 wounded, 200 captured and up to 100 combat vehicles 25 of which were tanks. Most of the [ Iraqi ] losses were sustained due to the artillery fire and aerial bombardment that resumed by the evening of March 27.
First conclusions can be drawn from the war
The first week of the war surprised a number of military analysts and experts. The war in Iraq uncovered a range of problems previously left without a serious discussion and disproved several resilient myths.
The first myth is about the precision-guided weapons as the determining factor in modern warfare, weapons that allow to achieve strategic superiority without direct contact with the enemy. On the one hand we have the fact that during the past 13 years the wars were won by the United States with minimum losses and, in essence, primarily through the use of aviation. At the same time, however, the US military command was stubborn in ignoring that the decisive factor in all these wars was not the military defeat of the resisting armies but political isolation coupled with strong diplomatic pressure on the enemy's political leadership. It was the creation of international coalitions against Iraq in 1991, against Yugoslavia in 1999 and against Afghanistan in 2001 that ensured the military success.
The American command preferred not to notice the obvious military failures during expeditions to Granada, Libya and Somalia, discounting them as "local operations" not deserving much attention.
Today we can see that in itself massed use of strategic and tactical precision-guided weapons did not provide the US with a strategic advantage. Despite the mass use of the most sophisticated weapons the Americans have so far failed to disrupt Iraqi command and control infrastructure, communication networks, top Iraqi military and political leadership, Iraqi air defenses. At the same time the US precision-guided weapons arsenal has been reduced by about 25%.
The only significant advantage of the precision-guided weapons is the capability to avoid massive casualties among the civilians in densely populated areas.
What we have is an obvious discrepancy between the ability to locate and attack a target with precision-guided weapons and the power of this weapon, which is not sufficient to reliably destroy a protected target.
On the other hand, precision-guided munitions demonstrated their superiority over conventional munitions on the battlefield. The ability to attack targets at long ranges with the first shot is the deciding factor in the American superiority in land battles.
The second myth disproved by this war is the myth propagated by the proponents of the "hi-tech" war, who believe in the superiority of the most modern weapons and inability of older-generation weapons to counteract the latest systems. Today the technological gap between the Iraqi weapons and those of the coalition has reached 25-30 years, which corresponds to two "generations" in weapons design. The primary Iraqi weapons correspond to the level of the early 1970s. Since that time the Americans, on the other hand, have launched at least two major rearmament efforts: the "75-83 program" and the "90-97 program". Moreover, currently the US is in the middle of another major modernization and rearmament program that will continue for the next five years. Despite of this obvious gap, Iraqi resistance has already been publicly qualified by the US as "fierce and resilient". Analysts believe that the correlation of losses is entirely acceptable to the Iraqis and they [ the analysts ] do not see any strategic coalition advantage in this war. Once again this proves that success in modern warfare is achieved not so much through technological superiority but primarily through training, competent command and resilience of the troops. Under such conditions even relatively old weapons can inflict heavy losses on a technologically-superior enemy.
Two enormous mistakes made by the US command during the planning stages of this war resulted in the obvious strategic failure. The US has underestimated the enemy. Despite the unique ability to conduct reconnaissance against the Iraqi military infrastructure through a wide network of agents implanted with the international teams of weapons inspectors, despite unlimited air dominance the US military command has failed to adequately evaluate combat readiness of the Iraqi army and its technical capabilities; the US has failed to correctly asses the social and political situation in Iraq and in the world in general. These failures led to entirely inadequate military and political decisions:
The coalition force was clearly insufficient for a such a large-scale operation. The number of deployed troops was at least 40% short of the required levels. This is the reason why today, after nine days of war, the US is forced to resort to emergency redeployment of more than 100,000 troops from the US territory and from Europe. This, in essence, is the same number of troops already fighting in Iraq.
The buildup and distribution of the coalition forces have been conducted with gross neglect of all basic rules of combat. All troops were massed in one small area, which led to five days of non-stop fighting to widen this area. The initial attack begun without any significant aerial or artillery preparation and almost immediately this resulted in reduced rate of advance and heated positional battles.
Today we can see that the US advance is characterized by disorganized and "impulsive" actions. The troops are simply trying to find weak spots in the Iraqi defenses and break through them until they hit the next ambush or the next line of defense.
Not a single goal set before the coalition forces was met on time.
During the nine days of the war the coalition has failed:
- to divide Iraq in half along the An-Nasiriya - Al-Ammara line,
- to surround and to destroy the Iraqi group of forces at Basra,
- to create an attack group between the Tigris and the Euphrates with a front toward Baghdad,
- to disrupt Iraq's military and political control, to disorganize Iraq's forces and to destroy the main Iraqi attack forces.
A whole range of problems that require their own solutions was uncovered directly on the battlefield. Thus, combat in Iraq raised serious concerns about the problem of coordination between units from different services. Limited decision-making time and the ability to detect and to engage an enemy at a great distance make "friendly fire" one of the most serious problems of modern warfare. For now the coalition has no adequate solution to this problem. At one location or another every day of this war the coalition troops were attacking friendly forces.
The second problem of the coalition is its inability to hold on to the captured territory. For the first time since the war in Vietnam the Americans have to deal with a partisan movement and with attacks against their [the US] lines of communication. Currently the coalition is rushing to form some sort of territorial defense units for guarding its supply lines and for maintaining order in the occupied territories.
A range of technical problems with equipment has been revealed during the combat operations. Most operators of the M1A2 Abrams main battle tank agree that the tank was inadequate for performing the set combat tasks. The primary problem is the extremely low reliability of the tank's engine and its transmission in desert conditions. Heat from the sun, hot sand and the constantly present hot dust in the air nearly nullified the advantages offered by the turret-mounted thermal sights. Visibility range of these sights did not exceed 300 meters during movement in convoy and reached up to 700-800 meters during stops. Only during cold nights did the visibility range reach 1000-1,500 meters. Additionally, a large number of thermal sights and other electronics simply broke down. The tiny crystalline sand particles caused electrical power surges and disabled electronic equipment.
This was the reason for the decision by the coalition command to stop movement of troops at night when a contact with the enemy was deemed likely.
The main strong side of the coalition forces was the wide availability of modern reconnaissance and communication systems that allowed to detect the enemy at long ranges and to quickly suppress the enemy with well-coordinated actions of different types of available forces.
In general the US soldiers showed sufficiently high combat resilience. Even in the extremely difficult weather conditions the troops maintained control structure and adequately interpreted the situation. Combat spirit remained high. The majority of troops remain confident in their abilities, while maintaining belief in the superiority of their weapons and maintaining reasonable confidence in the way the war is being fought.
It should be noted, however, that the way the war is being fought did create a certain sense of disappointment in most of the troops. Many are feeling that they've been lied to and are openly talking about the stupidity of the high command and its gross miscalculations. "Those star-covered Pentagon idiots promised us a victory march and flowers on the armor. What we got instead were those damned fanatics fighting for every dune and the sand squeaking in your ass!" said one of the wounded recuperating at a hospital in Rammstein. [ Reverse translation from Russian ]
Nevertheless, despite the sand storms the terrain favors the coalition actions by allowing it to employ their entire arsenal of weapons at the greatest possible range, which makes it difficult for the Iraqis to conduct combat operations outside of populated areas.
Overestimating the abilities of its airborne forces was a weak side of the coalition. Plans for a wide-scale use of helicopters as an independent force did not materialize. All attempts by the US command to organize aerial and ground operations through exclusive use of airborne forces have failed. Because of these failures by the end of the fourth day of the war all airborne units were distributed across the coalition units and used by the attacking forces for reconnaissance, fire support, and for containing the enemy. The main burden of combat was carried by the "heavy" mechanized infantry and tank units.
Another serious drawback in the coalition planning was the exceptionally weak protection in the rear of the advancing forces. This resulted in constant interruptions in fuel supply. Tank units sometimes spent up to 6 hours standing still with empty fuel tanks, in essence, being targets for the Iraqis. Throughout the war delivery of food, ammunition and fuel remains a headache for the US commanders.
Among the US soldiers there has been a wide-scale discontent with the quality of the new combat rations. Servicemen are openly calling these rations "shitty." Many soldier just take the biscuits and the sweets and discard the rest of the ration. Commanders of the combat units are demanding from the coalition command to immediately provide the troops with hot food and to review the entire contents of the combat ration.
Among the strong sides of the Iraqi troops are their excellent knowledge of the terrain, high quality of defensive engineering work, their ability to conceal their main attack forces and their resilience and determination in defense. The Iraqis have shown good organization in their command and communication structures as well as decisive and and well-planned strategy.
Among the drawbacks of the Iraqi forces is the bureaucratic inflexibility of their command, when all decisions are being made only at the highest levels. Their top commanders also tend to stick to standard "template" maneuvers and there is insufficient coordination among the different types of forces.
At the same time commanders of the [Iraqi] special operations forces are making good use of the available troops and weapons to conduct operations behind the front lines of the enemy. They use concealment, show cunning and imagination.
The first strategic lessons of the war
[ Lessons of the war in Iraq are discussed here with a focus on a possible similar war between Russia and the US ]
The main of such lessons is the ever-increasing significance of troop concealment as one of the primary methods of combat. Concealment and strict adherence to the requirements for secrecy and security become strategic goals of the defending forces in the view of the US reliance and that of its allies on precision-guided weapons, electronic and optical reconnaissance as well as due to their use of tactical weapons at the maximum possible range afforded by these reconnaissance methods. Importance of concealment is being seen in Iraq and was clearly demonstrated in Yugoslavia, where the Yugoslav Army preserved nearly 98% of its assets despite the three months of bombing. Within our [Russian/European] battle theater concealment methods will offer us [the Russian army] an enormous advantage over the US.
The second lesson of this war is the strategic role of the air defenses in modern warfare as the most important service of the armed forces. Only the complete air dominance of the coalition allows it to continue its advance toward Baghdad and to achieve the critical advantage in any engagement. Even the short interruption in air support caused by the sand storms put the US and British troops in a very difficult situation.
Elimination of the air defenses as a separate service branch of the [Russian] Armed Forces and its gradual dissipation in the Air Force can be called nothing else but a "crime". [This statement refers to the recent unification of the Russian Air Force (VVS) and the Air Defense Force (PVO) and the secondary role of the air defense force within this new structure.]
The third lesson of the war is the growing importance of combat reconnaissance and increased availability of anti-tank weapons capable of engaging the enemy at maximum range. There is a requirement on the battlefield for a new weapon system for small units that would allow for detection of the enemy at maximum distance during day or night; for effective engagement of modern tanks at a range of 800-1000 meters; for engagement of enemy infantry at a range of 300-500 meters even with the modern personal protection equipment possessed by the infantry.
(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-28-03, translated by Venik)
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - a week of war
March 28, 2003, 1448hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - According to the latest intercepted radio communications, the command of the coalition group of forces near Karabela requested at least 12 more hours to get ready to storm the town. This delay is due to the much heavier losses sustained by the coalition troops during the sand storms then was originally believed. Just the US 3rd Mechanized Infantry Division sustained more than 200 disabled combat vehicles of various types. The 101st Airborne Division reported some 70 helicopters as being disabled. Additionally, the recently delivered reinforcements require rest and time to prepare for combat.
At the same time the US forces have resumed attacks near An-Nasiriya and An-Najaf since 0630hrs and are continuously increasing the intensity of these attacks. During the night and early morning of March 28 the Iraqi positions in these areas were subjected to eight aerial assaults by bombers and ground attack aircraft. However, so far [the coalition] was unable to penetrate the Iraqi defenses.
Also during the early morning the British units begun advancing along the Fao peninsula. Latest radio intercepts from this area show that under a continuous artillery and aerial bombardment the Iraqis have begun to gradually withdraw their forces toward Basra.
First firefights between troops of the US 82nd Airborne Division and the Iraqi forces occurred in northern Iraq in the area of Mosula. At the same time the arrival of up to 1,500 Kurdish troops has been observed in this area. So far it is not clear to which of the many Kurdish political movements these troops belong. Leaders of the largest Kurdish workers party categorically denied participation of their troops. They believe that these may be units of one of the local tribes not controlled by the central authorities of the Kurdish autonomy and "ready to fight with anyone" for money.
According to verified information, during the past 48 hours of the Iraqi counterattacks the coalition forces sustained the following losses: up to 30 killed, over 110 wounded and 20 missing in action; up to 30 combat vehicles lost or disabled, including at least 8 tanks and 2 self-propelled artillery systems, 2 helicopters and 2 unmanned aerial vehicles were lost in combat. Iraqi losses are around 300 killed, up to 800 wounded, 200 captured and up to 100 combat vehicles 25 of which were tanks. Most of the [ Iraqi ] losses were sustained due to the artillery fire and aerial bombardment that resumed by the evening of March 27.
First conclusions can be drawn from the war
The first week of the war surprised a number of military analysts and experts. The war in Iraq uncovered a range of problems previously left without a serious discussion and disproved several resilient myths.
The first myth is about the precision-guided weapons as the determining factor in modern warfare, weapons that allow to achieve strategic superiority without direct contact with the enemy. On the one hand we have the fact that during the past 13 years the wars were won by the United States with minimum losses and, in essence, primarily through the use of aviation. At the same time, however, the US military command was stubborn in ignoring that the decisive factor in all these wars was not the military defeat of the resisting armies but political isolation coupled with strong diplomatic pressure on the enemy's political leadership. It was the creation of international coalitions against Iraq in 1991, against Yugoslavia in 1999 and against Afghanistan in 2001 that ensured the military success.
The American command preferred not to notice the obvious military failures during expeditions to Granada, Libya and Somalia, discounting them as "local operations" not deserving much attention.
Today we can see that in itself massed use of strategic and tactical precision-guided weapons did not provide the US with a strategic advantage. Despite the mass use of the most sophisticated weapons the Americans have so far failed to disrupt Iraqi command and control infrastructure, communication networks, top Iraqi military and political leadership, Iraqi air defenses. At the same time the US precision-guided weapons arsenal has been reduced by about 25%.
The only significant advantage of the precision-guided weapons is the capability to avoid massive casualties among the civilians in densely populated areas.
What we have is an obvious discrepancy between the ability to locate and attack a target with precision-guided weapons and the power of this weapon, which is not sufficient to reliably destroy a protected target.
On the other hand, precision-guided munitions demonstrated their superiority over conventional munitions on the battlefield. The ability to attack targets at long ranges with the first shot is the deciding factor in the American superiority in land battles.
The second myth disproved by this war is the myth propagated by the proponents of the "hi-tech" war, who believe in the superiority of the most modern weapons and inability of older-generation weapons to counteract the latest systems. Today the technological gap between the Iraqi weapons and those of the coalition has reached 25-30 years, which corresponds to two "generations" in weapons design. The primary Iraqi weapons correspond to the level of the early 1970s. Since that time the Americans, on the other hand, have launched at least two major rearmament efforts: the "75-83 program" and the "90-97 program". Moreover, currently the US is in the middle of another major modernization and rearmament program that will continue for the next five years. Despite of this obvious gap, Iraqi resistance has already been publicly qualified by the US as "fierce and resilient". Analysts believe that the correlation of losses is entirely acceptable to the Iraqis and they [ the analysts ] do not see any strategic coalition advantage in this war. Once again this proves that success in modern warfare is achieved not so much through technological superiority but primarily through training, competent command and resilience of the troops. Under such conditions even relatively old weapons can inflict heavy losses on a technologically-superior enemy.
Two enormous mistakes made by the US command during the planning stages of this war resulted in the obvious strategic failure. The US has underestimated the enemy. Despite the unique ability to conduct reconnaissance against the Iraqi military infrastructure through a wide network of agents implanted with the international teams of weapons inspectors, despite unlimited air dominance the US military command has failed to adequately evaluate combat readiness of the Iraqi army and its technical capabilities; the US has failed to correctly asses the social and political situation in Iraq and in the world in general. These failures led to entirely inadequate military and political decisions:
The coalition force was clearly insufficient for a such a large-scale operation. The number of deployed troops was at least 40% short of the required levels. This is the reason why today, after nine days of war, the US is forced to resort to emergency redeployment of more than 100,000 troops from the US territory and from Europe. This, in essence, is the same number of troops already fighting in Iraq.
The buildup and distribution of the coalition forces have been conducted with gross neglect of all basic rules of combat. All troops were massed in one small area, which led to five days of non-stop fighting to widen this area. The initial attack begun without any significant aerial or artillery preparation and almost immediately this resulted in reduced rate of advance and heated positional battles.
Today we can see that the US advance is characterized by disorganized and "impulsive" actions. The troops are simply trying to find weak spots in the Iraqi defenses and break through them until they hit the next ambush or the next line of defense.
Not a single goal set before the coalition forces was met on time.
During the nine days of the war the coalition has failed:
- to divide Iraq in half along the An-Nasiriya - Al-Ammara line,
- to surround and to destroy the Iraqi group of forces at Basra,
- to create an attack group between the Tigris and the Euphrates with a front toward Baghdad,
- to disrupt Iraq's military and political control, to disorganize Iraq's forces and to destroy the main Iraqi attack forces.
A whole range of problems that require their own solutions was uncovered directly on the battlefield. Thus, combat in Iraq raised serious concerns about the problem of coordination between units from different services. Limited decision-making time and the ability to detect and to engage an enemy at a great distance make "friendly fire" one of the most serious problems of modern warfare. For now the coalition has no adequate solution to this problem. At one location or another every day of this war the coalition troops were attacking friendly forces.
The second problem of the coalition is its inability to hold on to the captured territory. For the first time since the war in Vietnam the Americans have to deal with a partisan movement and with attacks against their [the US] lines of communication. Currently the coalition is rushing to form some sort of territorial defense units for guarding its supply lines and for maintaining order in the occupied territories.
A range of technical problems with equipment has been revealed during the combat operations. Most operators of the M1A2 Abrams main battle tank agree that the tank was inadequate for performing the set combat tasks. The primary problem is the extremely low reliability of the tank's engine and its transmission in desert conditions. Heat from the sun, hot sand and the constantly present hot dust in the air nearly nullified the advantages offered by the turret-mounted thermal sights. Visibility range of these sights did not exceed 300 meters during movement in convoy and reached up to 700-800 meters during stops. Only during cold nights did the visibility range reach 1000-1,500 meters. Additionally, a large number of thermal sights and other electronics simply broke down. The tiny crystalline sand particles caused electrical power surges and disabled electronic equipment.
This was the reason for the decision by the coalition command to stop movement of troops at night when a contact with the enemy was deemed likely.
The main strong side of the coalition forces was the wide availability of modern reconnaissance and communication systems that allowed to detect the enemy at long ranges and to quickly suppress the enemy with well-coordinated actions of different types of available forces.
In general the US soldiers showed sufficiently high combat resilience. Even in the extremely difficult weather conditions the troops maintained control structure and adequately interpreted the situation. Combat spirit remained high. The majority of troops remain confident in their abilities, while maintaining belief in the superiority of their weapons and maintaining reasonable confidence in the way the war is being fought.
It should be noted, however, that the way the war is being fought did create a certain sense of disappointment in most of the troops. Many are feeling that they've been lied to and are openly talking about the stupidity of the high command and its gross miscalculations. "Those star-covered Pentagon idiots promised us a victory march and flowers on the armor. What we got instead were those damned fanatics fighting for every dune and the sand squeaking in your ass!" said one of the wounded recuperating at a hospital in Rammstein. [ Reverse translation from Russian ]
Nevertheless, despite the sand storms the terrain favors the coalition actions by allowing it to employ their entire arsenal of weapons at the greatest possible range, which makes it difficult for the Iraqis to conduct combat operations outside of populated areas.
Overestimating the abilities of its airborne forces was a weak side of the coalition. Plans for a wide-scale use of helicopters as an independent force did not materialize. All attempts by the US command to organize aerial and ground operations through exclusive use of airborne forces have failed. Because of these failures by the end of the fourth day of the war all airborne units were distributed across the coalition units and used by the attacking forces for reconnaissance, fire support, and for containing the enemy. The main burden of combat was carried by the "heavy" mechanized infantry and tank units.
Another serious drawback in the coalition planning was the exceptionally weak protection in the rear of the advancing forces. This resulted in constant interruptions in fuel supply. Tank units sometimes spent up to 6 hours standing still with empty fuel tanks, in essence, being targets for the Iraqis. Throughout the war delivery of food, ammunition and fuel remains a headache for the US commanders.
Among the US soldiers there has been a wide-scale discontent with the quality of the new combat rations. Servicemen are openly calling these rations "shitty." Many soldier just take the biscuits and the sweets and discard the rest of the ration. Commanders of the combat units are demanding from the coalition command to immediately provide the troops with hot food and to review the entire contents of the combat ration.
Among the strong sides of the Iraqi troops are their excellent knowledge of the terrain, high quality of defensive engineering work, their ability to conceal their main attack forces and their resilience and determination in defense. The Iraqis have shown good organization in their command and communication structures as well as decisive and and well-planned strategy.
Among the drawbacks of the Iraqi forces is the bureaucratic inflexibility of their command, when all decisions are being made only at the highest levels. Their top commanders also tend to stick to standard "template" maneuvers and there is insufficient coordination among the different types of forces.
At the same time commanders of the [Iraqi] special operations forces are making good use of the available troops and weapons to conduct operations behind the front lines of the enemy. They use concealment, show cunning and imagination.
The first strategic lessons of the war
[ Lessons of the war in Iraq are discussed here with a focus on a possible similar war between Russia and the US ]
The main of such lessons is the ever-increasing significance of troop concealment as one of the primary methods of combat. Concealment and strict adherence to the requirements for secrecy and security become strategic goals of the defending forces in the view of the US reliance and that of its allies on precision-guided weapons, electronic and optical reconnaissance as well as due to their use of tactical weapons at the maximum possible range afforded by these reconnaissance methods. Importance of concealment is being seen in Iraq and was clearly demonstrated in Yugoslavia, where the Yugoslav Army preserved nearly 98% of its assets despite the three months of bombing. Within our [Russian/European] battle theater concealment methods will offer us [the Russian army] an enormous advantage over the US.
The second lesson of this war is the strategic role of the air defenses in modern warfare as the most important service of the armed forces. Only the complete air dominance of the coalition allows it to continue its advance toward Baghdad and to achieve the critical advantage in any engagement. Even the short interruption in air support caused by the sand storms put the US and British troops in a very difficult situation.
Elimination of the air defenses as a separate service branch of the [Russian] Armed Forces and its gradual dissipation in the Air Force can be called nothing else but a "crime". [This statement refers to the recent unification of the Russian Air Force (VVS) and the Air Defense Force (PVO) and the secondary role of the air defense force within this new structure.]
The third lesson of the war is the growing importance of combat reconnaissance and increased availability of anti-tank weapons capable of engaging the enemy at maximum range. There is a requirement on the battlefield for a new weapon system for small units that would allow for detection of the enemy at maximum distance during day or night; for effective engagement of modern tanks at a range of 800-1000 meters; for engagement of enemy infantry at a range of 300-500 meters even with the modern personal protection equipment possessed by the infantry.
(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-28-03, translated by Venik)
Thursday, March 27, 2003
WAR ON IRAK ANALYSIS
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - requirement for more troops
March 27, 2003, 1425hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - There has been a sharp increase in activity on the southern front. As of 0700hrs the coalition forces are subjected to nearly constant attacks along the entire length of the front. The Iraqi command took the advantage of the raging sand storm to regroup its troops and to reinforce the defenses along the approaches to Karabela and An-Najaf with two large armored units (up to two armored brigades totaling up to 200 tanks). The Iraqi attack units were covertly moved near the positions of the US 3rd Infantry Division (Motorized) and the 101st Airborne Division. With sunrise and a marginal visibility improvement the Iraqis attacked these US forces in the flank to the west of Karabela.
Simultaneously, massive artillery barrages and counterattacks were launched against units of the US 3rd Infantry Division and the 101st Airborne Division conducting combat operations near An-Najaf. The situation [for the US troops] was complicated by the fact that the continuing sand storm forced them to group their units into battalion convoys in order to avoid losing troops and equipment in near zero-visibility conditions. These battalion convoys were concentrated along the roads leading to Karabela and An-Najaf and had only limited defenses. There was no single line of the front; aerial reconnaissance in these conditions was not possible and until the very last moment the coalition command was unaware of the Iraqi preparations.
During one of such attacks [the Iraqi forces] caught off-guard a unit of the US 3rd Infantry Division that was doing vehicle maintenance and repairs. In a short battle the US unit was destroyed and dispersed, leaving behind one armored personnel carrier, a repair vehicle and two Abrams tanks, one of which was fully operational.
At the present time visibility in the combat zone does not exceed 300 meters, which limits the effectiveness of the 101st Airborne Division and that of its 70 attack helicopters representing the main aerial reconnaissance and ground support force of the coalition. One of the coalition transport helicopters crashed yesterday during take-off. The reason for the crash was sand in the engine compressors.
The Iraqis were able to get in range for close combat without losses and now fierce battles are continuing in the areas of Karabela and An-Najaf. The main burden of supporting the coalition ground troops has been placed with the artillery and ground attack aircraft. Effectiveness of the latter is minimal due to the weather conditions. Strikes can be delivered only against old Iraqi targets with known coordinates, while actually supporting the ground troops engaged in combat is virtually impossible and attempts to do so lead to the most unfortunate consequences.
Intercepted radio communications show that at around 0615hrs this morning the lead of a flight of two A-10 ground attack planes detected a convoy of armored vehicles. Unable to see any markings identifying these vehicles as friendly and not being able to contact the convoy by radio the pilot directed artillery fire to the coordinates of the convoy.
Later it was discovered that this was a coalition convoy. Thick layers of dust covered up the identification markings - colored strips of cloth in the rear of the vehicles. Electronic jamming made radio contact impossible. First reports indicated that the US unit lost 50 troops killed and wounded. At least five armored vehicles have been destroyed, one of which was an Abrams tank.
During the past day the coalition losses in this area [ Karabela and An-Najaf ] were 18-22 killed and up to 40 wounded. Most of the fatalities were sustained due to unexpected attacks by the Iraqi Special Forces against the coalition rears and against communication sites. This is a sign of the increasing diversionary and partisan actions by the Iraqis.
During the same period of time the Iraqi forces sustained up to 100 killed, about the same number of wounded and up to 50 captured.
Since the beginning of the operation no more than 2000 Iraqi troops were captured by the coalition. The majority of the captured troops were members of regional defense [militia] units.
The Iraqis were able to move significant reinforcements to the area of An-Nasiriya making it now extremely difficult for the Americans to widen their staging areas on the left bank of the Euphrates. Moreover, the Americans [on the left bank of the Euphrates] may end up in a very difficult situation if the Iraqis manage to destroy the bridges and to separate [these US units] from the main coalition force. The US forces in this area consist of up to 4,000 Marines from the 1st Marine Division and supporting units of the 82nd Airborne Division. Currently, fighting has resumed in the An-Nasiriya suburbs.
During one of the Iraqi attacks yesterday against the US positions the Iraqis for the first time employed the "Grad" mobile multiple rocket launch systems [MLRS]. As the result an entire US unit was taken out of combat after sustaining up to 40 killed and wounded as well as losing up to 7 armored vehicles.
There are no other reports of any losses in this area [ An-Nasiriya] except for one US Marine drowning in one of the city's water canals and another Marine being killed by a sniper.
During the sand storm the coalition command lost contact with up to 4 coalition reconnaissance groups. Their whereabouts are being determined. It is still unknown what happened to more than 600 other coalition troops mainly from resupply, communications and reconnaissance units communication with which was lost during the past 24 hours.
The situation around Basra remains unclear. The Iraqis control the city and its suburbs, as well as the area south of Basra and the part of the adjacent Fao peninsula, which the British have so far failed to take. The British forces are blockading Basra from the west and northwest. However, due to difficult marshy terrain crossed by numerous waterways the British have been unable to create a single line of front and to establish a complete blockade of the city. Currently main combat operations are being launched for control of a small village near Basra where the local airport is located. The British field commanders report that there has been no drop in the combat activity of the Iraqis. On the contrary, under the cover of the sand storm up to two battalions of the "surrendered" Iraqi 51st Infantry Division were moved to the Fao peninsula to support the local defending forces.
Rumors about an uprising by the Basra Shiite population turned out to be false. Moreover, the Shiite community leaders called on the local residents to fight the "children of the Satan" - the Americans and the British.
During the past 24 hours the British sustained no less than 3 killed and up to 10 wounded due to mortar and sniper fire.
It is difficult to estimate the Iraqi losses [in Basra] due to limited available information. However, some reports suggest that up to 30 Iraqi troops were killed during the past day by artillery and aircraft fire.
During an attack against a coalition checkpoint in Umm Qasr last night one British marine infantry soldier was heavily wounded. This once again points to the tentative nature of the British claims of control over the town.
Information coming from northern regions of Iraq indicates that most of the Kurdish leaders chose not to participate in the US war against Iraq. The primary reason for that is the mistrust of the Kurds toward the US. Yesterday one of the Russian intelligence sources obtained information about a secret agreement reached between the US and the Turkish government. In the agreement the US, behind the backs of the Kurds, promised Turkey not to support in any way a formation of a Kurdish state in this region. The US has also promised not to prevent Turkey from sending its troops [ to Northern Kurdistan] immediately following [the coalition] capture of northern Iraq.
In essence, this gives Turkey a card-blanche to use force for a "cleanup" in Kurdistan. At the same time the Kurdish troops will be moved to fight the Iraqis outside of Kurdistan, thus rendering them unable to support their own people.
Along the border with Kurdistan Turkey has already massed a 40,000-strong army expeditionary corps that is specializing in combat operations against the Kurds. This force remains at a 4-hour readiness to begin combat operations.
All of this indicates that the coalition command will be unable to create a strong "Northern Front" during the next 3-4 days and that the US Marines and paratroopers in this area will have to limit their operations to distracting the Iraqis and to launching reconnaissance missions.
During a meeting with the Germany's chancellor [ Gerhard ] Schroeder the heads of the German military and political intelligence reported that the US is doing everything possible to conceal information on the situation in the combat zone and that the US shows an extremely "unfriendly" attitude. Germany's own intelligence-gathering capabilities in this region are very limited. This is the result of Germany, being true to its obligations as an ally, not attempting to bolster its national intelligence operations in the region and not trying to separate its intelligence agencies from the intelligence structures of NATO and the US.
There has been a confirmation of yesterday's reports about the plans of the coalition command to increase its forces fighting in Iraq. The troops of the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) are currently being airlifted to the region, while its equipment is traveling by sea around the Arabian Peninsula and the unloading is expected to begin as early as by the end of tomorrow. The Division numbers 30,000 soldiers and officers. By the end of April up to 120,000 more US troops, up to 500 tanks and up to 300 more helicopters will be moved to the region.
In addition to that, today the US President [George W] Bush asked the British Prime-Minister [Tony] Blair to increase the British military presence in Iraq by a minimum of 15,000-20,000 troops.
At the current level of combat operations and at the current level of Iraqi resistance the coalition may face a sharp shortage of troops and weapons within the next 5-7 days, which will allow the Iraqis to take the initiative. The White House took this conclusion of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff with great concern.
During the past seven days of the war the US Navy detained all ships in the Persian Gulf going to Iraq under the US "Oil for Food" program. Since yesterday all these ships are being unloaded in Kuwait. Unloaded food is being delivered by the US military to Iraq and is being distributed as "American humanitarian aid" and as a part of the "rebuilding Iraq" program. These US actions have already cause a serious scandal in the UN. The US explained its actions by its unilateral decision to freeze all Iraqi financial assets, including the Iraqi financial assets with the UN. These assets the US now considers its property and will exercise full control over them. Captains of the detained ships have already called these actions by the US a "piracy."
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - requirement for more troops
March 27, 2003, 1425hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - There has been a sharp increase in activity on the southern front. As of 0700hrs the coalition forces are subjected to nearly constant attacks along the entire length of the front. The Iraqi command took the advantage of the raging sand storm to regroup its troops and to reinforce the defenses along the approaches to Karabela and An-Najaf with two large armored units (up to two armored brigades totaling up to 200 tanks). The Iraqi attack units were covertly moved near the positions of the US 3rd Infantry Division (Motorized) and the 101st Airborne Division. With sunrise and a marginal visibility improvement the Iraqis attacked these US forces in the flank to the west of Karabela.
Simultaneously, massive artillery barrages and counterattacks were launched against units of the US 3rd Infantry Division and the 101st Airborne Division conducting combat operations near An-Najaf. The situation [for the US troops] was complicated by the fact that the continuing sand storm forced them to group their units into battalion convoys in order to avoid losing troops and equipment in near zero-visibility conditions. These battalion convoys were concentrated along the roads leading to Karabela and An-Najaf and had only limited defenses. There was no single line of the front; aerial reconnaissance in these conditions was not possible and until the very last moment the coalition command was unaware of the Iraqi preparations.
During one of such attacks [the Iraqi forces] caught off-guard a unit of the US 3rd Infantry Division that was doing vehicle maintenance and repairs. In a short battle the US unit was destroyed and dispersed, leaving behind one armored personnel carrier, a repair vehicle and two Abrams tanks, one of which was fully operational.
At the present time visibility in the combat zone does not exceed 300 meters, which limits the effectiveness of the 101st Airborne Division and that of its 70 attack helicopters representing the main aerial reconnaissance and ground support force of the coalition. One of the coalition transport helicopters crashed yesterday during take-off. The reason for the crash was sand in the engine compressors.
The Iraqis were able to get in range for close combat without losses and now fierce battles are continuing in the areas of Karabela and An-Najaf. The main burden of supporting the coalition ground troops has been placed with the artillery and ground attack aircraft. Effectiveness of the latter is minimal due to the weather conditions. Strikes can be delivered only against old Iraqi targets with known coordinates, while actually supporting the ground troops engaged in combat is virtually impossible and attempts to do so lead to the most unfortunate consequences.
Intercepted radio communications show that at around 0615hrs this morning the lead of a flight of two A-10 ground attack planes detected a convoy of armored vehicles. Unable to see any markings identifying these vehicles as friendly and not being able to contact the convoy by radio the pilot directed artillery fire to the coordinates of the convoy.
Later it was discovered that this was a coalition convoy. Thick layers of dust covered up the identification markings - colored strips of cloth in the rear of the vehicles. Electronic jamming made radio contact impossible. First reports indicated that the US unit lost 50 troops killed and wounded. At least five armored vehicles have been destroyed, one of which was an Abrams tank.
During the past day the coalition losses in this area [ Karabela and An-Najaf ] were 18-22 killed and up to 40 wounded. Most of the fatalities were sustained due to unexpected attacks by the Iraqi Special Forces against the coalition rears and against communication sites. This is a sign of the increasing diversionary and partisan actions by the Iraqis.
During the same period of time the Iraqi forces sustained up to 100 killed, about the same number of wounded and up to 50 captured.
Since the beginning of the operation no more than 2000 Iraqi troops were captured by the coalition. The majority of the captured troops were members of regional defense [militia] units.
The Iraqis were able to move significant reinforcements to the area of An-Nasiriya making it now extremely difficult for the Americans to widen their staging areas on the left bank of the Euphrates. Moreover, the Americans [on the left bank of the Euphrates] may end up in a very difficult situation if the Iraqis manage to destroy the bridges and to separate [these US units] from the main coalition force. The US forces in this area consist of up to 4,000 Marines from the 1st Marine Division and supporting units of the 82nd Airborne Division. Currently, fighting has resumed in the An-Nasiriya suburbs.
During one of the Iraqi attacks yesterday against the US positions the Iraqis for the first time employed the "Grad" mobile multiple rocket launch systems [MLRS]. As the result an entire US unit was taken out of combat after sustaining up to 40 killed and wounded as well as losing up to 7 armored vehicles.
There are no other reports of any losses in this area [ An-Nasiriya] except for one US Marine drowning in one of the city's water canals and another Marine being killed by a sniper.
During the sand storm the coalition command lost contact with up to 4 coalition reconnaissance groups. Their whereabouts are being determined. It is still unknown what happened to more than 600 other coalition troops mainly from resupply, communications and reconnaissance units communication with which was lost during the past 24 hours.
The situation around Basra remains unclear. The Iraqis control the city and its suburbs, as well as the area south of Basra and the part of the adjacent Fao peninsula, which the British have so far failed to take. The British forces are blockading Basra from the west and northwest. However, due to difficult marshy terrain crossed by numerous waterways the British have been unable to create a single line of front and to establish a complete blockade of the city. Currently main combat operations are being launched for control of a small village near Basra where the local airport is located. The British field commanders report that there has been no drop in the combat activity of the Iraqis. On the contrary, under the cover of the sand storm up to two battalions of the "surrendered" Iraqi 51st Infantry Division were moved to the Fao peninsula to support the local defending forces.
Rumors about an uprising by the Basra Shiite population turned out to be false. Moreover, the Shiite community leaders called on the local residents to fight the "children of the Satan" - the Americans and the British.
During the past 24 hours the British sustained no less than 3 killed and up to 10 wounded due to mortar and sniper fire.
It is difficult to estimate the Iraqi losses [in Basra] due to limited available information. However, some reports suggest that up to 30 Iraqi troops were killed during the past day by artillery and aircraft fire.
During an attack against a coalition checkpoint in Umm Qasr last night one British marine infantry soldier was heavily wounded. This once again points to the tentative nature of the British claims of control over the town.
Information coming from northern regions of Iraq indicates that most of the Kurdish leaders chose not to participate in the US war against Iraq. The primary reason for that is the mistrust of the Kurds toward the US. Yesterday one of the Russian intelligence sources obtained information about a secret agreement reached between the US and the Turkish government. In the agreement the US, behind the backs of the Kurds, promised Turkey not to support in any way a formation of a Kurdish state in this region. The US has also promised not to prevent Turkey from sending its troops [ to Northern Kurdistan] immediately following [the coalition] capture of northern Iraq.
In essence, this gives Turkey a card-blanche to use force for a "cleanup" in Kurdistan. At the same time the Kurdish troops will be moved to fight the Iraqis outside of Kurdistan, thus rendering them unable to support their own people.
Along the border with Kurdistan Turkey has already massed a 40,000-strong army expeditionary corps that is specializing in combat operations against the Kurds. This force remains at a 4-hour readiness to begin combat operations.
All of this indicates that the coalition command will be unable to create a strong "Northern Front" during the next 3-4 days and that the US Marines and paratroopers in this area will have to limit their operations to distracting the Iraqis and to launching reconnaissance missions.
During a meeting with the Germany's chancellor [ Gerhard ] Schroeder the heads of the German military and political intelligence reported that the US is doing everything possible to conceal information on the situation in the combat zone and that the US shows an extremely "unfriendly" attitude. Germany's own intelligence-gathering capabilities in this region are very limited. This is the result of Germany, being true to its obligations as an ally, not attempting to bolster its national intelligence operations in the region and not trying to separate its intelligence agencies from the intelligence structures of NATO and the US.
There has been a confirmation of yesterday's reports about the plans of the coalition command to increase its forces fighting in Iraq. The troops of the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) are currently being airlifted to the region, while its equipment is traveling by sea around the Arabian Peninsula and the unloading is expected to begin as early as by the end of tomorrow. The Division numbers 30,000 soldiers and officers. By the end of April up to 120,000 more US troops, up to 500 tanks and up to 300 more helicopters will be moved to the region.
In addition to that, today the US President [George W] Bush asked the British Prime-Minister [Tony] Blair to increase the British military presence in Iraq by a minimum of 15,000-20,000 troops.
At the current level of combat operations and at the current level of Iraqi resistance the coalition may face a sharp shortage of troops and weapons within the next 5-7 days, which will allow the Iraqis to take the initiative. The White House took this conclusion of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff with great concern.
During the past seven days of the war the US Navy detained all ships in the Persian Gulf going to Iraq under the US "Oil for Food" program. Since yesterday all these ships are being unloaded in Kuwait. Unloaded food is being delivered by the US military to Iraq and is being distributed as "American humanitarian aid" and as a part of the "rebuilding Iraq" program. These US actions have already cause a serious scandal in the UN. The US explained its actions by its unilateral decision to freeze all Iraqi financial assets, including the Iraqi financial assets with the UN. These assets the US now considers its property and will exercise full control over them. Captains of the detained ships have already called these actions by the US a "piracy."
WAR ON IRAK
Guardian: Awkward squad tries to sharpen view
They call themselves the "awkward squad" and their questions to the generals running the war in Iraq are starting to divide the sceptical press from their more loyal American colleagues.
The front row of the briefing hall at the central command headquarters in the deserts of Qatar is largely reserved for the American television networks. But frequently the toughest questioning has come from rows further back where there are the less accepting British, Arab and Chinese press.
After America took its heaviest losses in battle for years on Sunday, an Abu Dhabi television reporter asked General Tommy Franks, the US commander: "Are you practising a strategy of lies and deception or have you just been trapped by the Iraqi army?"
When television showed the first American prisoners of war, Geoff Meade, the Sky News correspondent in Qatar, asked an American general how he would answer those in the Muslim world who "may hail the first capture of American servicemen and women."
A few minutes later an American journalist - Michael Wolff of New York magazine - took a different approach. He asked the general if he considered al-Jazeera as "hostile media" for broadcasting the footage in the first place.
The milder style favoured by some of the US correspondents is reflected by a question posed by a presenter with the American network CBS, who asked at Gen Franks' first briefing on Saturday: "The campaign so far has gone with breathtaking speed. Has it surprised you, or is it going more or less as you expected?"
The apparent divide across the Atlantic may signal the greater support for the war in Iraq among the American public and the often more deferential nature of their journalists. Correspondents corralled into a warehouse at the US central command camp outside Doha have frequently found themselves frustrated at the lack of information on offer.
Guardian: Awkward squad tries to sharpen view
They call themselves the "awkward squad" and their questions to the generals running the war in Iraq are starting to divide the sceptical press from their more loyal American colleagues.
The front row of the briefing hall at the central command headquarters in the deserts of Qatar is largely reserved for the American television networks. But frequently the toughest questioning has come from rows further back where there are the less accepting British, Arab and Chinese press.
After America took its heaviest losses in battle for years on Sunday, an Abu Dhabi television reporter asked General Tommy Franks, the US commander: "Are you practising a strategy of lies and deception or have you just been trapped by the Iraqi army?"
When television showed the first American prisoners of war, Geoff Meade, the Sky News correspondent in Qatar, asked an American general how he would answer those in the Muslim world who "may hail the first capture of American servicemen and women."
A few minutes later an American journalist - Michael Wolff of New York magazine - took a different approach. He asked the general if he considered al-Jazeera as "hostile media" for broadcasting the footage in the first place.
The milder style favoured by some of the US correspondents is reflected by a question posed by a presenter with the American network CBS, who asked at Gen Franks' first briefing on Saturday: "The campaign so far has gone with breathtaking speed. Has it surprised you, or is it going more or less as you expected?"
The apparent divide across the Atlantic may signal the greater support for the war in Iraq among the American public and the often more deferential nature of their journalists. Correspondents corralled into a warehouse at the US central command camp outside Doha have frequently found themselves frustrated at the lack of information on offer.
WAR ON IRAK
John Pilger: Today - A Day Of Shame - John Pilger
TODAY is a day of shame for the British military as it declares the Iraqi city of Basra, with a stricken population of 600,000, a "military target". : :26 Mar 2003
TODAY is a day of shame for the British military as it declares the
Iraqi city of Basra, with a stricken population of 600,000, a "military
target". :.. Yesterday, Blair said that 400,000 Iraqi children had died in the
past five years from malnutrition and related causes. He said "huge
stockpiles of humanitarian aid" and clean water awaited them in Kuwait, if only
the Iraqi regime would allow safe passage. In fact, voluminous evidence,
including that published by the United Nations Children's Fund, makes
clear that the main reason these children have died is an enduring siege, a
12-year embargo driven by America and Britain. As of last July,
$5.4billion worth of humanitarian supplies, approved by the UN and paid
for by the Iraqi government, were blocked by Washington, with the Blair
government's approval. The former assistant secretary general of the
UN, Denis Halliday, who was sent to Iraq to set up the "oil for food
programme", described the effects of the embargo as "nothing less than
genocide". Similar words have been used by his successor, Hans Von
Sponeck. Both men resigned in protest, saying the embargo merely reinforced the
power of Saddam. Both called Blair a liar.
John Pilger: Today - A Day Of Shame - John Pilger
TODAY is a day of shame for the British military as it declares the Iraqi city of Basra, with a stricken population of 600,000, a "military target". : :26 Mar 2003
TODAY is a day of shame for the British military as it declares the
Iraqi city of Basra, with a stricken population of 600,000, a "military
target". :.. Yesterday, Blair said that 400,000 Iraqi children had died in the
past five years from malnutrition and related causes. He said "huge
stockpiles of humanitarian aid" and clean water awaited them in Kuwait, if only
the Iraqi regime would allow safe passage. In fact, voluminous evidence,
including that published by the United Nations Children's Fund, makes
clear that the main reason these children have died is an enduring siege, a
12-year embargo driven by America and Britain. As of last July,
$5.4billion worth of humanitarian supplies, approved by the UN and paid
for by the Iraqi government, were blocked by Washington, with the Blair
government's approval. The former assistant secretary general of the
UN, Denis Halliday, who was sent to Iraq to set up the "oil for food
programme", described the effects of the embargo as "nothing less than
genocide". Similar words have been used by his successor, Hans Von
Sponeck. Both men resigned in protest, saying the embargo merely reinforced the
power of Saddam. Both called Blair a liar.
WORLD WIDE PROTESTS
Scotsman: World Wide Protests Continue
ANTI-WAR protests continued around the world yesterday, with
demonstrations
leading to violence and arrests in Australia and the Middle East. In
Sydney, 45 people were arrested after demonstrators pelted police with
tables, chairs and bottles from pavement cafés. There were also arrests
and injuries at demonstrations in Tripoli in Lebanon, and in Seoul, the
South Korean capital. American businesses became the focus of anger in
Pakistan, where the US flag was burnt in the streets. Anti-war
protesters
in the country called for a boycott of US businesses such as KFC.
Scotsman: World Wide Protests Continue
ANTI-WAR protests continued around the world yesterday, with
demonstrations
leading to violence and arrests in Australia and the Middle East. In
Sydney, 45 people were arrested after demonstrators pelted police with
tables, chairs and bottles from pavement cafés. There were also arrests
and injuries at demonstrations in Tripoli in Lebanon, and in Seoul, the
South Korean capital. American businesses became the focus of anger in
Pakistan, where the US flag was burnt in the streets. Anti-war
protesters
in the country called for a boycott of US businesses such as KFC.
WAR ON IRAK
Guardian: Jubilation turns to hate as aid arrives
The young man wearing the brown shawl summed it up succinctly: "We want you to go back home. We do not want your American and British aid," he said, his eyes flashing with anger.
If the British humanitarian taskforce had any doubts as to the legitimacy of his claims, the sudden burst of gunfire from a nearby building left no one in any doubt.
The first attempt to deliver aid to the Iraqi people was, in all respects, a practical and logistical disaster. A convoy of vehicles, including two water tankers and as many Warrior armoured vehicles, had set off from the abandoned Shaiba airfield earlier. The intent was to deliver food and water to win over the hearts and minds of the beleaguered Iraqis.
As the convoy pulled up inside the town, however, a crowd of predominantly young men ran towards it. Fights and skirmishes broke out for bottles of water. Iraqis asked for food and cigarettes. And while a cordon was quickly created, hundreds rushed towards the trucks, overpowering the soldiers.
"We have had no water and no food," said Ali Abdullah, 50. He stood away from the crowd, stroking his beard and surveyed the scene intently as crowds of young men fought over the water.
Guardian: Jubilation turns to hate as aid arrives
The young man wearing the brown shawl summed it up succinctly: "We want you to go back home. We do not want your American and British aid," he said, his eyes flashing with anger.
If the British humanitarian taskforce had any doubts as to the legitimacy of his claims, the sudden burst of gunfire from a nearby building left no one in any doubt.
The first attempt to deliver aid to the Iraqi people was, in all respects, a practical and logistical disaster. A convoy of vehicles, including two water tankers and as many Warrior armoured vehicles, had set off from the abandoned Shaiba airfield earlier. The intent was to deliver food and water to win over the hearts and minds of the beleaguered Iraqis.
As the convoy pulled up inside the town, however, a crowd of predominantly young men ran towards it. Fights and skirmishes broke out for bottles of water. Iraqis asked for food and cigarettes. And while a cordon was quickly created, hundreds rushed towards the trucks, overpowering the soldiers.
"We have had no water and no food," said Ali Abdullah, 50. He stood away from the crowd, stroking his beard and surveyed the scene intently as crowds of young men fought over the water.
WAR ON IRAK
Spiegel: US-Basen im Irak heißen Shell und Exxon
Kritiker, die den Irak-Feldzug vor allem für einen Krieg ums Öl halten, sehen sich durch die neueste PR-Panne des Pentagons bestätigt. Die wenig subtilen Militärs hatten offenbar keine Hemmungen, zwei Armee-Camps im Kriegsgebiet nach großen Ölkonzernen zu benennen.
New York - Einhaltung der Menschenrechte, Beseitigung von Massenvernichtungswaffen und Stärkung der Demokratie sind angeblich die hehren Ziele, welche die US-Regierung im Irak verfolgt.
Umso peinlicher ist, wie sorglos das US-Militär mit dem für die Regierung heiklen Ölthema umgeht. Wie die "New York Times" berichtet, tragen zwei Lager der 101st Airborne Division im Zentral-Irak die Namen von Ölkonzernen. Eines trägt den Titel "Forward Operating Base Shell", ein weiteres heißt "Forward Operating Base Exxon". Kriegsgegner werfen dem Weißen Haus seit Längerem vor, es gehe den Amerikanern bei der Beseitigung von Saddam Husseins Regime einzig und allein ums Öl.
Spiegel: US-Basen im Irak heißen Shell und Exxon
Kritiker, die den Irak-Feldzug vor allem für einen Krieg ums Öl halten, sehen sich durch die neueste PR-Panne des Pentagons bestätigt. Die wenig subtilen Militärs hatten offenbar keine Hemmungen, zwei Armee-Camps im Kriegsgebiet nach großen Ölkonzernen zu benennen.
New York - Einhaltung der Menschenrechte, Beseitigung von Massenvernichtungswaffen und Stärkung der Demokratie sind angeblich die hehren Ziele, welche die US-Regierung im Irak verfolgt.
Umso peinlicher ist, wie sorglos das US-Militär mit dem für die Regierung heiklen Ölthema umgeht. Wie die "New York Times" berichtet, tragen zwei Lager der 101st Airborne Division im Zentral-Irak die Namen von Ölkonzernen. Eines trägt den Titel "Forward Operating Base Shell", ein weiteres heißt "Forward Operating Base Exxon". Kriegsgegner werfen dem Weißen Haus seit Längerem vor, es gehe den Amerikanern bei der Beseitigung von Saddam Husseins Regime einzig und allein ums Öl.
WAR ON IRAK
Independent: Robert Fisk: 'It was an outrage, an obscenity'
It was an outrage, an obscenity. The severed hand on the metal door, the swamp of blood and mud across the road, the human brains inside a garage, the incinerated, skeletal remains of an Iraqi mother and her three small children in their still-smouldering car.
Two missiles from an American jet killed them all – by my estimate, more than 20 Iraqi civilians, torn to pieces before they could be 'liberated' by the nation that destroyed their lives. Who dares, I ask myself, to call this 'collateral damage'? Abu Taleb Street was packed with pedestrians and motorists when the American pilot approached through the dense sandstorm that covered northern Baghdad in a cloak of red and yellow dust and rain yesterday morning.
It's a dirt-poor neighbourhood, of mostly Shia Muslims, the same people whom Messrs Bush and Blair still fondly hope will rise up against President Saddam Hussein, a place of oil-sodden car-repair shops, overcrowded apartments and cheap cafés. Everyone I spoke to heard the plane. One man, so shocked by the headless corpses he had just seen, could say only two words. "Roar, flash," he kept saying and then closed his eyes so tight that the muscles rippled between them.
We may put on the hairshirt of morality in explaining why these people should die. They died because of 11 September, we may say, because of President Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction", because of human rights abuses, because of our desperate desire to "liberate" them all. Let us not confuse the issue with oil. Either way, I'll bet we are told President Saddam is ultimately responsible for their deaths. We shan't mention the pilot, of course.
CHECK IT
Independent: Robert Fisk: 'It was an outrage, an obscenity'
It was an outrage, an obscenity. The severed hand on the metal door, the swamp of blood and mud across the road, the human brains inside a garage, the incinerated, skeletal remains of an Iraqi mother and her three small children in their still-smouldering car.
Two missiles from an American jet killed them all – by my estimate, more than 20 Iraqi civilians, torn to pieces before they could be 'liberated' by the nation that destroyed their lives. Who dares, I ask myself, to call this 'collateral damage'? Abu Taleb Street was packed with pedestrians and motorists when the American pilot approached through the dense sandstorm that covered northern Baghdad in a cloak of red and yellow dust and rain yesterday morning.
It's a dirt-poor neighbourhood, of mostly Shia Muslims, the same people whom Messrs Bush and Blair still fondly hope will rise up against President Saddam Hussein, a place of oil-sodden car-repair shops, overcrowded apartments and cheap cafés. Everyone I spoke to heard the plane. One man, so shocked by the headless corpses he had just seen, could say only two words. "Roar, flash," he kept saying and then closed his eyes so tight that the muscles rippled between them.
We may put on the hairshirt of morality in explaining why these people should die. They died because of 11 September, we may say, because of President Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction", because of human rights abuses, because of our desperate desire to "liberate" them all. Let us not confuse the issue with oil. Either way, I'll bet we are told President Saddam is ultimately responsible for their deaths. We shan't mention the pilot, of course.
CHECK IT
AFGHANISTAN
The guerilla warfare is costing American and other Western troops their lives. It is the result of their miscalculations. The following articles should illustrate some of the ways of revenge the Afghans deal with their enemy. The first article is from frontier Post and the second and third are from Pakistan Tribune. My sources confirmed their accuracy.
Sincerely
Mohammed Daud Miraki, MA, MA, PhD
mdmiraki@ameritech.net
Five Americans Killed
DERA ISMAEL KHAN (NNI) -- Five Americans are feared dead when some remnants of al-Qaeda and Taliban prompted a sudden attack on an office of the US Federal Bureau of Intelligence at Barmil, Pak-Afghan border. The attackers used Rocket Launcher and automatic guns in the sudden attack prompted last night, a highly placed source from across the border revealed to NNI correspondent here Wednesday. The informer further said that the office of FBI was established close to Check-post at Pakistan-Afghanistan border and the attack was so sudden that the border security guards comprising US-led coalition troops and Afghan officials did not retaliate.
The border security guards inside Afghanistan noticed the attack from a mountain range some hundred meters away from the check-post. The political administration has put on high alert the paramilitary personnel and other administrative units in South Waziristan, a Pakistani tribal area adjacent to the Afghan borders where the incident took place. According to the information reached here from across the border, the FBI agents were there as part of their mission to assist the US-led coalition troops searching remnants of Al-Qaeda and Taliban in the area. These FBI agents were also cooperating with Pakistani law enforcing agencies in the bordering areas to Afghanistan as part of the latest campaign being launched after the arrest of number three in the hierarchy of al-Qaeda, Khalid Shaikh Mohammad [?] who was apprehended on March 1 in Rawalpindi and presently is in the custody of the American at an unknown place.
Meanwhile, Taliban fighters attacked a government checkpoint in northwestern Afghanistan, starting fighting that left at least 13 combatants dead, a military commander said Wednesday. About 400 gunmen attacked the checkpoint Tuesday in Tora Shaikh in the northwestern province of Badghis near the border with Turkmenistan, said Mohammad Karim Khadem, a brigade commander in the area. Seven attackers and six government soldiers were killed in fighting on Tuesday and Wednesday, Khadem said.
4 Allied Soldiers Killed In Taliban Rocket Attack
3-25-3
SARAI NORANG (Online) -- Taliban forces have stepped up guerrilla warfare against coalition forces in Khost and killed 4 coalition soldiers and injured 6 in a rocket attack.
As per details, the Allied forces and the Afghan troops were on their routine patrolling duty in a pick up in surrounding area of Latkoo in Khost on the night between the Sunday and Monday.
The Taliban militants lobbed rockets targeting Allied forces. The rocket onslaught left 4 allied troops killed and 6 injured on the occasion. The injured were shifted to hospital immediately.
In another incident one allied soldier was injured grievously when Taliban militants fired rockets on a patrolling party jeep on its way to the airport. The other soldiers sitting in jeep were left unhurt as the rocket could not explode inside the vehicle.
In another offensive, the Taliban militants ambushed on the allied forces central camp at Yawar.
The Afghan troops were fast asleep while guarding the allied forces. The Taliban forces overpowered them and with their assistance they moved to the trenches of Allied forces.
Taliban guerrillas captured allied troops, slaughtered two of them and amputated their limbs. They took away three allied soldiers with them to some unknown destination.
The surprise rocket offensives from the Taliban forces have created panic among the allied forces and the latter have discontinued their night patrolling in the area for fear of enemy's strikes.
4 US Troops Among 5 Killed In Afghanistan
1-28-3
MIRAN SHAH (Online) -- Unidentified persons Monday ambushed the vehicle of allied forces in Urgzan area of Paktia Province of Afghanistan that resulted in the killing of five persons including four American soldiers .
Local authorities said that vehicle of allied forces was came under rocket attack when it was coming back to base after conducting patrolling in New Mandi area resulting in the killing of four American soldiers and an Afghan .
Allied forces soon after the incident started the search of suspected attackers in the area, sources said .
The guerilla warfare is costing American and other Western troops their lives. It is the result of their miscalculations. The following articles should illustrate some of the ways of revenge the Afghans deal with their enemy. The first article is from frontier Post and the second and third are from Pakistan Tribune. My sources confirmed their accuracy.
Sincerely
Mohammed Daud Miraki, MA, MA, PhD
mdmiraki@ameritech.net
Five Americans Killed
DERA ISMAEL KHAN (NNI) -- Five Americans are feared dead when some remnants of al-Qaeda and Taliban prompted a sudden attack on an office of the US Federal Bureau of Intelligence at Barmil, Pak-Afghan border. The attackers used Rocket Launcher and automatic guns in the sudden attack prompted last night, a highly placed source from across the border revealed to NNI correspondent here Wednesday. The informer further said that the office of FBI was established close to Check-post at Pakistan-Afghanistan border and the attack was so sudden that the border security guards comprising US-led coalition troops and Afghan officials did not retaliate.
The border security guards inside Afghanistan noticed the attack from a mountain range some hundred meters away from the check-post. The political administration has put on high alert the paramilitary personnel and other administrative units in South Waziristan, a Pakistani tribal area adjacent to the Afghan borders where the incident took place. According to the information reached here from across the border, the FBI agents were there as part of their mission to assist the US-led coalition troops searching remnants of Al-Qaeda and Taliban in the area. These FBI agents were also cooperating with Pakistani law enforcing agencies in the bordering areas to Afghanistan as part of the latest campaign being launched after the arrest of number three in the hierarchy of al-Qaeda, Khalid Shaikh Mohammad [?] who was apprehended on March 1 in Rawalpindi and presently is in the custody of the American at an unknown place.
Meanwhile, Taliban fighters attacked a government checkpoint in northwestern Afghanistan, starting fighting that left at least 13 combatants dead, a military commander said Wednesday. About 400 gunmen attacked the checkpoint Tuesday in Tora Shaikh in the northwestern province of Badghis near the border with Turkmenistan, said Mohammad Karim Khadem, a brigade commander in the area. Seven attackers and six government soldiers were killed in fighting on Tuesday and Wednesday, Khadem said.
4 Allied Soldiers Killed In Taliban Rocket Attack
3-25-3
SARAI NORANG (Online) -- Taliban forces have stepped up guerrilla warfare against coalition forces in Khost and killed 4 coalition soldiers and injured 6 in a rocket attack.
As per details, the Allied forces and the Afghan troops were on their routine patrolling duty in a pick up in surrounding area of Latkoo in Khost on the night between the Sunday and Monday.
The Taliban militants lobbed rockets targeting Allied forces. The rocket onslaught left 4 allied troops killed and 6 injured on the occasion. The injured were shifted to hospital immediately.
In another incident one allied soldier was injured grievously when Taliban militants fired rockets on a patrolling party jeep on its way to the airport. The other soldiers sitting in jeep were left unhurt as the rocket could not explode inside the vehicle.
In another offensive, the Taliban militants ambushed on the allied forces central camp at Yawar.
The Afghan troops were fast asleep while guarding the allied forces. The Taliban forces overpowered them and with their assistance they moved to the trenches of Allied forces.
Taliban guerrillas captured allied troops, slaughtered two of them and amputated their limbs. They took away three allied soldiers with them to some unknown destination.
The surprise rocket offensives from the Taliban forces have created panic among the allied forces and the latter have discontinued their night patrolling in the area for fear of enemy's strikes.
4 US Troops Among 5 Killed In Afghanistan
1-28-3
MIRAN SHAH (Online) -- Unidentified persons Monday ambushed the vehicle of allied forces in Urgzan area of Paktia Province of Afghanistan that resulted in the killing of five persons including four American soldiers .
Local authorities said that vehicle of allied forces was came under rocket attack when it was coming back to base after conducting patrolling in New Mandi area resulting in the killing of four American soldiers and an Afghan .
Allied forces soon after the incident started the search of suspected attackers in the area, sources said .
WAR ON IRAK
Arabnews: Gulf States May Be Next: British MP
JEDDAH, 26 March 2003 — In an exclusive interview with Arab News yesterday, British Member of Parliament George Galloway said he had evidence that one motive for the war on Iraq is the eventual partition of the Mideast.
“Here in the Houses of Parliament there are people who have never set foot in an Arab country openly discussing the partition of Gulf states,” he said in a telephone interview from London.
“They talk about whether it should be one country, two countries, three countries, even four countries. They openly discuss changing the boundaries of old countries, creating new countries — removing this and that leader,” he added.
Speaking about George W. Bush, Galloway said that he was unimpressive. However, “the US has stirred up a vast amount of hatred against itself by this swaggering arrogance of the intellectually limited President, roaring like a bull in a bomber jacket in aircraft hangars to young men and women of the American armed forces who, although they know very little of the world, are ready to get out there and kill.”
He pointed to what he saw as the geo-political aspirations of the US government as the real motives for the current conflict.
“These people have decided that Arab countries must metamorphose into countries acceptable to the US. That means they must change their way of life, their culture, even their religion. It’s openly stated in the American media that the Qur’an itself has to be changed, because in it there are concepts of justice and resistance which are completely unacceptable to the new American century.”
Galloway argued that the British people and British soldiers were told that the Iraqis would be garlanding the GI’s who came to “liberate” them.
"Hat sich Amerika und England eigentlich mal überlegt was wirklich passieren würde wenn der Nahe Osten demokratisch wäre? Ein Demokratischer NaherOsten wäre ein Anti-Amerikanischer Naher Osten"
Arabnews: Gulf States May Be Next: British MP
JEDDAH, 26 March 2003 — In an exclusive interview with Arab News yesterday, British Member of Parliament George Galloway said he had evidence that one motive for the war on Iraq is the eventual partition of the Mideast.
“Here in the Houses of Parliament there are people who have never set foot in an Arab country openly discussing the partition of Gulf states,” he said in a telephone interview from London.
“They talk about whether it should be one country, two countries, three countries, even four countries. They openly discuss changing the boundaries of old countries, creating new countries — removing this and that leader,” he added.
Speaking about George W. Bush, Galloway said that he was unimpressive. However, “the US has stirred up a vast amount of hatred against itself by this swaggering arrogance of the intellectually limited President, roaring like a bull in a bomber jacket in aircraft hangars to young men and women of the American armed forces who, although they know very little of the world, are ready to get out there and kill.”
He pointed to what he saw as the geo-political aspirations of the US government as the real motives for the current conflict.
“These people have decided that Arab countries must metamorphose into countries acceptable to the US. That means they must change their way of life, their culture, even their religion. It’s openly stated in the American media that the Qur’an itself has to be changed, because in it there are concepts of justice and resistance which are completely unacceptable to the new American century.”
Galloway argued that the British people and British soldiers were told that the Iraqis would be garlanding the GI’s who came to “liberate” them.
"Hat sich Amerika und England eigentlich mal überlegt was wirklich passieren würde wenn der Nahe Osten demokratisch wäre? Ein Demokratischer NaherOsten wäre ein Anti-Amerikanischer Naher Osten"
WAR ON IRAK
Scoop.nz: When The Coalition Kills And CNN Lies
The images of carnage and severed bodies are quite telling. On Wednesday, coalition fighter jets bombed what they claimed were missile launchers located 'near' civilian areas in Baghdad. Instead, they hit a bustling marketplace in the heart of Baghdad.
The BBC's Rageh Omar was one of the first western journalists to reach the area: "I saw human remains, bits of severed hands, bits of skull. Al-Shaab is a residential district. I saw people in apartment blocks throwing out their belongings attempting to leave. It was a scene of confusion as emergency services tried to rush to the scene.Our correspondents were unable to find an obvious military target in the area."
( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2888429.stm)
Al Jazeera also made it to the scene and was able to film dead bodies being removed from the rubble, some dismembered, others covered entirely in dust and blood.
Images that were broadcast into the homes of more than 50 million Arabs in the Middle East and around the world.
CNN would not budge. They refused to acknowledge that such civilian deaths had occurred. Instead, they persisted in one of their banner headlines that "Iraqi civilians are being killed by Iraqis, not coalition".
They didn't show footage.
Scoop.nz: When The Coalition Kills And CNN Lies
The images of carnage and severed bodies are quite telling. On Wednesday, coalition fighter jets bombed what they claimed were missile launchers located 'near' civilian areas in Baghdad. Instead, they hit a bustling marketplace in the heart of Baghdad.
The BBC's Rageh Omar was one of the first western journalists to reach the area: "I saw human remains, bits of severed hands, bits of skull. Al-Shaab is a residential district. I saw people in apartment blocks throwing out their belongings attempting to leave. It was a scene of confusion as emergency services tried to rush to the scene.Our correspondents were unable to find an obvious military target in the area."
( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2888429.stm)
Al Jazeera also made it to the scene and was able to film dead bodies being removed from the rubble, some dismembered, others covered entirely in dust and blood.
Images that were broadcast into the homes of more than 50 million Arabs in the Middle East and around the world.
CNN would not budge. They refused to acknowledge that such civilian deaths had occurred. Instead, they persisted in one of their banner headlines that "Iraqi civilians are being killed by Iraqis, not coalition".
They didn't show footage.
Wednesday, March 26, 2003
WAR ON IRAK
Washington Times: A reckless path by Paul Craig Roberts 20.03.03
We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy.
— U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, U.S. representative to the International Conference on Military Trials, Aug. 12, 1945.
Will Bush be impeached? Will he be called a war criminal? These are not hyperbolic questions. Mr. Bush has permitted a small cadre of neoconservatives to isolate him from world opinion, putting him at odds with the United Nations and America's allies.
The administration's use of forged evidence opens Mr. Bush to unflattering comparisons that his enemies will not hesitate to make. They will point out that it was Adolf Hitler's strategy to fabricate evidence in order to justify his invasion of a helpless country. He used S.S. troops dressed in Polish uniforms to fake an attack on the German radio station at Gleiwitz on Aug. 31, 1939. Following the faked attack, Hitler announced: "This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our own territory." As German troops poured into Poland, Hitler declared: "The Polish state has refused the peaceful settlement of relations which I desired, and has appealed to arms." The German High Command called the German invasion of Poland a "counterattack."
Mr. Bush and his advisers have forgotten that the power of an American president is temporary and relative. The U.S. is supposed to be the world's leader. For the Bush administration to pursue a policy that sets the U.S. government at odds with the world is to invite comparisons with recklessness that we have not seen in international politics since Nikita Khrushchev tried to install nuclear missiles in Cuba. Is Saddam Hussein worth this much grief
Washington Times: A reckless path by Paul Craig Roberts 20.03.03
We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy.
— U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, U.S. representative to the International Conference on Military Trials, Aug. 12, 1945.
Will Bush be impeached? Will he be called a war criminal? These are not hyperbolic questions. Mr. Bush has permitted a small cadre of neoconservatives to isolate him from world opinion, putting him at odds with the United Nations and America's allies.
The administration's use of forged evidence opens Mr. Bush to unflattering comparisons that his enemies will not hesitate to make. They will point out that it was Adolf Hitler's strategy to fabricate evidence in order to justify his invasion of a helpless country. He used S.S. troops dressed in Polish uniforms to fake an attack on the German radio station at Gleiwitz on Aug. 31, 1939. Following the faked attack, Hitler announced: "This night for the first time Polish regular soldiers fired on our own territory." As German troops poured into Poland, Hitler declared: "The Polish state has refused the peaceful settlement of relations which I desired, and has appealed to arms." The German High Command called the German invasion of Poland a "counterattack."
Mr. Bush and his advisers have forgotten that the power of an American president is temporary and relative. The U.S. is supposed to be the world's leader. For the Bush administration to pursue a policy that sets the U.S. government at odds with the world is to invite comparisons with recklessness that we have not seen in international politics since Nikita Khrushchev tried to install nuclear missiles in Cuba. Is Saddam Hussein worth this much grief
WORLD WAR 3
From the Wilderness: THE PERFECT STORM - Part I
- With the UN Neutralized There Are No More Rules
- The U.S. Economy on the Brink
- Global Oil Shortages and Massive Price Hikes Imminent
- Paralysis Looming in U.S. Government
- The WTO and Rockefellers Turning on Bush
- A World War that Will Pit the U.S. Against Europe and Russia in a Struggle for Survival with the Winners Facing China
George W. Bush’s United States will punish its recent adversaries at the UN. They will be cut out of the Iraqi spoils. But Germany, France, Russia and China have a much more realistic view of Iraqi oil than the U.S. does. Bush and his corporate allies have marketed to the markets that sometime in the next month or two we’re going to see a real bonanza as oil prices fall back to $15-20 dollar per barrel and stay there. It is not going to happen.
On March 7, FTW Contributing Editor for Energy, Dale Allen Pfeiffer broke down the reality of Iraqi oil. It’s not what’s in the ground that counts now, it’s what can be gotten to market. The Bush gamble is a big long shot and getting longer by the minute. Iraqi oil infrastructure is crumbling after twelve years of sanctions and there won’t be any increase in Iraqi production without major investment and rebuilding. That takes time. The Guardian disclosed on January 26 that the U.S. is currently buying more than a million barrels per day (Mbpd) from Iraq out of the ten million that it imports from around the world. What might happen if just that million barrels went away?
From the Wilderness: THE PERFECT STORM - Part II
"Shock and Awe" Is "Mocked and Flawed" -- War Plan Stumbles as Bush Tells CNN, "It’s Gonna Take a While to Achieve Our Objective... This Is Just the Beginning of a Tough Fight." -- U.S. Soldiers Captured, Iraqi Resistance Significant and Toughening
U.S. Press/Political Hostility to Bush Administration Intensifies – Major Papers Discussing Criminal Behavior, Impeachment as Focus Intensifies on Forged Niger Uranium Docs – Cheney, Powell and Rumsfeld Implicated
Oil Bonanza Fading as Economic Indicators Weaken in an Unstable Environment – Iraqi Oil Deliveries Interrupted – Reality Tramples Market Exuberance
Turk-Kurdish Chaos More Likely
Has the U.S. Been Set Up by Europe, Russia and China?
March 24, 2003, 2100 EDT (FTW) – Atlanta, Military, economic, oil, and political storms continue to gather and converge in what may become a Perfect Storm for the Bush Administration and the United States economy.
On the fifth day of a U.S. military campaign rejected by the U.N. Security Council, at least 12 U.S. soldiers have been captured by Iraqi forces near al Nasiriyah even as various foreign news sources are reporting that as many as four to ten of the vaunted M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks have been destroyed in combat. A helicopter aircrew has been captured further north. ABC has reported that coalition casualties are approaching 200. Promises that Iraqi civilians expecting liberation would greet coalition troops with open arms have been unfulfilled as Iraqi resistance stiffens on a daily basis. In a tragic event, an African-American Sergeant of the 101st Air Assault Division staged a grenade attack on tents occupied by his comrades-in-arms, killing one and wounding fourteen. The fallout from this tragedy will have lasting repercussions on the psyches of both U.S. military and civilian populations. Images of an American Black man face down and handcuffed - no matter how serious the offense - will not fade quickly and will further erode an extremely fragile and increasingly volatile domestic landscape. The suspect is Muslim.
Saddam Hussein and his forces are now gaining strength, political cachet, and popular support with each new engagement while coalition forces lose it with every casualty and delay. One of the first questions asked at a somber, live press conference at Central Command headquarters in Qatar on Sunday was, "Has America gotten itself into another Vietnam?" This question came after only three days of ground combat. Around the Arab and Muslim world, Saddam Hussein’s picture is becoming an icon of anti-colonial resistance. Over a thousand years of European and American history, the Arab world has never given in easily to occupying forces; they always prefer one of their own – no matter how distasteful – to an outsider. The Crusades were the earliest lesson for Europe and the Suez crisis of 1956 the most recent.
Consistent with predictions made in FTW, the Turkish government, poised to send several brigades into northern Iraq, is threatening to turn Northern Iraq into absolute chaos. The Kurds who live in the region ethnically blur the borders of Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran and their support is critical to U.S. military plans. Having sought an independent homeland for decades, they have been consistently used by the U.S. and western powers for covert operations and destabilization programs and they have always been betrayed later. At the moment FTW gives a 50-50 likelihood that the U.S. will ultimately – and after much protestation for effect – allow the Turkish incursion. That will instantly create a highly unstable and balkanized region. The U.S. has historically both created and preferred "balkanization" to secure commercial control of natural resources and civilian populations with devastating results for anyone living in the region. This could ultimately – if the U.S. invasion is successful - result in Iraq being divided into three or more separately governed regions.
Spiegel: "Die Zeit dauerhaft niedriger Ölpreise ist vorbei"
Der Krieg im Irak rückt die Ölreserven ins Blickfeld: Wie lange reichen die Vorräte noch? Im Interview mit SPIEGEL ONLINE erklärt der Energieexperte Jörg Schindler, warum das Fördermaximum seiner Meinung nach schon erreicht ist.
"CHECK IT"
From the Wilderness: THE PERFECT STORM - Part I
- With the UN Neutralized There Are No More Rules
- The U.S. Economy on the Brink
- Global Oil Shortages and Massive Price Hikes Imminent
- Paralysis Looming in U.S. Government
- The WTO and Rockefellers Turning on Bush
- A World War that Will Pit the U.S. Against Europe and Russia in a Struggle for Survival with the Winners Facing China
George W. Bush’s United States will punish its recent adversaries at the UN. They will be cut out of the Iraqi spoils. But Germany, France, Russia and China have a much more realistic view of Iraqi oil than the U.S. does. Bush and his corporate allies have marketed to the markets that sometime in the next month or two we’re going to see a real bonanza as oil prices fall back to $15-20 dollar per barrel and stay there. It is not going to happen.
On March 7, FTW Contributing Editor for Energy, Dale Allen Pfeiffer broke down the reality of Iraqi oil. It’s not what’s in the ground that counts now, it’s what can be gotten to market. The Bush gamble is a big long shot and getting longer by the minute. Iraqi oil infrastructure is crumbling after twelve years of sanctions and there won’t be any increase in Iraqi production without major investment and rebuilding. That takes time. The Guardian disclosed on January 26 that the U.S. is currently buying more than a million barrels per day (Mbpd) from Iraq out of the ten million that it imports from around the world. What might happen if just that million barrels went away?
From the Wilderness: THE PERFECT STORM - Part II
"Shock and Awe" Is "Mocked and Flawed" -- War Plan Stumbles as Bush Tells CNN, "It’s Gonna Take a While to Achieve Our Objective... This Is Just the Beginning of a Tough Fight." -- U.S. Soldiers Captured, Iraqi Resistance Significant and Toughening
U.S. Press/Political Hostility to Bush Administration Intensifies – Major Papers Discussing Criminal Behavior, Impeachment as Focus Intensifies on Forged Niger Uranium Docs – Cheney, Powell and Rumsfeld Implicated
Oil Bonanza Fading as Economic Indicators Weaken in an Unstable Environment – Iraqi Oil Deliveries Interrupted – Reality Tramples Market Exuberance
Turk-Kurdish Chaos More Likely
Has the U.S. Been Set Up by Europe, Russia and China?
March 24, 2003, 2100 EDT (FTW) – Atlanta, Military, economic, oil, and political storms continue to gather and converge in what may become a Perfect Storm for the Bush Administration and the United States economy.
On the fifth day of a U.S. military campaign rejected by the U.N. Security Council, at least 12 U.S. soldiers have been captured by Iraqi forces near al Nasiriyah even as various foreign news sources are reporting that as many as four to ten of the vaunted M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks have been destroyed in combat. A helicopter aircrew has been captured further north. ABC has reported that coalition casualties are approaching 200. Promises that Iraqi civilians expecting liberation would greet coalition troops with open arms have been unfulfilled as Iraqi resistance stiffens on a daily basis. In a tragic event, an African-American Sergeant of the 101st Air Assault Division staged a grenade attack on tents occupied by his comrades-in-arms, killing one and wounding fourteen. The fallout from this tragedy will have lasting repercussions on the psyches of both U.S. military and civilian populations. Images of an American Black man face down and handcuffed - no matter how serious the offense - will not fade quickly and will further erode an extremely fragile and increasingly volatile domestic landscape. The suspect is Muslim.
Saddam Hussein and his forces are now gaining strength, political cachet, and popular support with each new engagement while coalition forces lose it with every casualty and delay. One of the first questions asked at a somber, live press conference at Central Command headquarters in Qatar on Sunday was, "Has America gotten itself into another Vietnam?" This question came after only three days of ground combat. Around the Arab and Muslim world, Saddam Hussein’s picture is becoming an icon of anti-colonial resistance. Over a thousand years of European and American history, the Arab world has never given in easily to occupying forces; they always prefer one of their own – no matter how distasteful – to an outsider. The Crusades were the earliest lesson for Europe and the Suez crisis of 1956 the most recent.
Consistent with predictions made in FTW, the Turkish government, poised to send several brigades into northern Iraq, is threatening to turn Northern Iraq into absolute chaos. The Kurds who live in the region ethnically blur the borders of Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran and their support is critical to U.S. military plans. Having sought an independent homeland for decades, they have been consistently used by the U.S. and western powers for covert operations and destabilization programs and they have always been betrayed later. At the moment FTW gives a 50-50 likelihood that the U.S. will ultimately – and after much protestation for effect – allow the Turkish incursion. That will instantly create a highly unstable and balkanized region. The U.S. has historically both created and preferred "balkanization" to secure commercial control of natural resources and civilian populations with devastating results for anyone living in the region. This could ultimately – if the U.S. invasion is successful - result in Iraq being divided into three or more separately governed regions.
Spiegel: "Die Zeit dauerhaft niedriger Ölpreise ist vorbei"
Der Krieg im Irak rückt die Ölreserven ins Blickfeld: Wie lange reichen die Vorräte noch? Im Interview mit SPIEGEL ONLINE erklärt der Energieexperte Jörg Schindler, warum das Fördermaximum seiner Meinung nach schon erreicht ist.
"CHECK IT"
WAR ON IRAK
Spiegel: Bombenangriff auf Wohngebiet - mindestens 14 Tote
Bei einer Explosion in einem Wohngebiet in Bagdad wurden zahlreiche Menschen getötet. Irakischen Angaben zufolge waren zwei Marschflugkörper der Alliierten in Wohnhäuser eingeschlagen. Auch ein Marktplatz sei bei einem Luftangriff getroffen worden, es habe viele Tote gegeben.
Ein BBC-Reporter sagte, er habe mehrere Leichen gesehen. "Ich habe Gliedmaßen gesehen, Hände, einen Schädel, Kleider, Schuhe." Mehrere Geschäfte seien völlig zerstört worden. Anwohner hätten ihm von 45 Toten berichtet.
"Also entweder sind die "precision guided missiles" nicht wirklich so präzis wie man das uns im CNN verkaufen will. Oder sie sind wirklich genau und werden mit Absicht auf Wohnhäuser geschossen"
Spiegel: Bombenangriff auf Wohngebiet - mindestens 14 Tote
Bei einer Explosion in einem Wohngebiet in Bagdad wurden zahlreiche Menschen getötet. Irakischen Angaben zufolge waren zwei Marschflugkörper der Alliierten in Wohnhäuser eingeschlagen. Auch ein Marktplatz sei bei einem Luftangriff getroffen worden, es habe viele Tote gegeben.
Ein BBC-Reporter sagte, er habe mehrere Leichen gesehen. "Ich habe Gliedmaßen gesehen, Hände, einen Schädel, Kleider, Schuhe." Mehrere Geschäfte seien völlig zerstört worden. Anwohner hätten ihm von 45 Toten berichtet.
"Also entweder sind die "precision guided missiles" nicht wirklich so präzis wie man das uns im CNN verkaufen will. Oder sie sind wirklich genau und werden mit Absicht auf Wohnhäuser geschossen"
WAR ON IRAK ANALYSIS
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - fighting the people
-Basra immer noch nicht unter Kontrolle
-An-Nasiriya noch nicht unter Kontrolle
-Bis zu 20 Aufklärungs Teams der Iraker hinter Koalitions Linien
-Sandstürme beschädigen über 100 Fahrzeuge der "Koalitions-Armee"
-Kirkuk nicht unter Kontrolle
-Keine Kurdische unterstützung im Nordirak
-Alle schon vor dem Krieg ausgemachten Ziele wurden zwischen 3 und 7 mal Bombardiert. Ohne Effekt auf die Irakische Armee
-nachschub von precision-guided missiles um ein drittel reduziert
March 25, 2003, 1230hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - As of the morning March 25 the situation on Iraqi fronts remains quiet. Both sides are actively preparing for future engagements. Exhausted in combat the US 3rd Motorized Infantry Division is now being reinforced with fresh units from Kuwait (presumably with up to 1 Marine brigade and 1 tank brigade from the 1st Armored Division (all coming from the coalition command reserves) and elements of the British 7th Tank Brigade from the area of Umm Qasr. The troops have a stringent requirement to regroup and, after conducting additional reconnaissance, to capture An-Nasiriya within two days.
The Iraqis have reinforced the An-Nasiriya garrison with several artillery battalions and a large number of anti-tank weapons. Additionally, the Iraqis are actively deploying landmines along the approaches to their positions.
However, currently all combat has nearly ceased due to the sand storm raging over the region. Weather forecasts anticipate the storm's end by noon of March 26. According to intercepted radio communications the coalition advance will be tied to the end of the sand storm and is planned to take place during the night of March 26-27. The coalition command believes that a night attack will allow its forces to achieve the element of surprise and to use its advantage in specialized night fighting equipment.
There have been no reports of any losses resulting from direct combat in the past 10 hours. However, there is information about two coalition combat vehicles destroyed by landmines. Three US soldiers were wounded in one of these incidents.
Positional warfare continues near Basra. The coalition forces in this area are clearly insufficient for continuing the attack and the main emphasis is being placed on artillery and aviation. The city is under constant bombardment but so far this had little impact on the combat readiness of the Iraqi units. Thus, last night an Iraqi battalion reinforced with tanks swung around the coalition positions in the area of Basra airport and attacked the coalition forces in the flanks. As the result of this attack the US forces have been thrown back 1.5-2 kilometers leaving the airport and the nearby structures in the hands of the Iraqis. Two APCs and one tank were destroyed in this encounter. According to radio intelligence at least two US soldiers were killed and no less than six US soldiers were wounded.
The coalition forces are still unable to completely capture the small town of Umm Qasr. By the end of yesterday coalition units were controlling only the strategic roads going through the town, but fierce fighting continued in the residential districts. At least two British servicemen were killed by sniper fire in Umm Qasr during the past 24 hours.
The coalition command is extremely concerned with growing resistance movement in the rear of the advancing forces. During a meeting at the coalition command headquarters it was reported that up to 20 Iraqi reconnaissance units are active behind the coalition rear. The Iraqis attack lightly armed supply units; they deploy landmines and conduct reconnaissance. Additionally, captured villages have active armed resistance that is conducting reconnaissance in the interests of the Iraqi command and is organizing attacks against coalition troops. During the past 24 hours more than 30 coalition wheeled and armored vehicles have been lost to such attacks. Some 7 coalition servicemen are missing, 3 soldiers are dead and 10 are wounded.
The coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks ordered his forces to clear coalition rears from Iraqi diversionary units and partisans in the shortest possible time. The British side will be responsible for fulfilling these orders. A unit from the 22nd SAS regiment supported by the US 1st, 5th and 10th Special Operations Groups will carry out this operation. Each of these groups has up to 12 units numbering 12-15 troops each. All of these units have some Asian or Arabic Americans. The groups also have guides and translators from among local Iraqi collaborators, who went through rapid training at specialized centers in the Czech Republic and in the UK.
The sand storms turned out to be the main enemy of the American military equipment. Just the 3rd Motorized Infantry Division had more than 100 vehicles disabled. This is causing serious concern on the part of the coalition command. The repair crews are working around the clock to return all the disabled equipment back into service. The M1A2 Abrams tanks are not known for the their reliable engines as it is, but in the sand storm conditions multiple breakdowns became a real problem for the tank crews.
All attempts by the US paratroopers to capture the town of Kirkuk have yielded no result. The Americans counted on the support of the Kurds but the latter refused to take a direct part in the attack and demanded guarantees from the US command that it will prevent a Turkish invasion. The Turkish themselves are avoiding making any promises.
Additionally, the situation [at Kirkuk] is affected by the lack of heavy weapons on the part of the US paratroopers. The aviation support alone is clearly not sufficient. The northern group of forces commander Marine Brig. Gen. Osman has requested artillery and armored vehicles.
All indications are that so far the US is unable to form a combat-capable strike force in this area.
According to satellite reconnaissance it seems likely that the Iraqis had time to remove the captured Apache Longbow attack helicopter of the 11th Aviation Regiment. The pieces remaining at the landing site following a US bombing strike indicate that the bombs hit a crudely constructed mockup.
Aerial bombardment of Baghdad has so far failed to produce the expected results. All targets designated before the war have been hit 3 to 7 times, but this had almost no effect on the combat readiness of the Iraqi army, their air defenses or the command and control structures.
It seems that during preparation for the war the Iraqis were able to create new, well-protected communication lines and control centers. There is plenty of intelligence information indicating that so far the US electronic reconnaissance was unable to locate and to penetrate the Iraqi command's communication network, which is an indication of the network's high technological sophistication.
A particular point of concern for the US command is the huge overuse of precision-guided munitions and cruise missiles. Already the supply of heavy cruise missiles like the "Tomahawk" has been reduced by a third and, at the current rate of use, in three weeks the US will be left only with the untouchable strategic supply of these missiles. A similar situation exists with other types of precision-guided munitions. "The rate of their use is incompatible with the obtained results. We are literally dropping gold into the mud!" said Gen. Richard Mayers during a meeting in Pentagon yesterday morning. [reverse translation from Russian]
The US experts already call this war a "crisis". "It was enough for the enemy to show a little resistance and some creative thinking as our technological superiority begun to quickly lose all its meaning. Our expenses are not justified by the obtained results. The enemy is using an order of magnitude cheaper weapons to reach the same goals for which we spend billions on technological whims of the defense industry!" said Gen. Stanley McCrystal during the same Pentagon meeting. [reverse translation from Russian]
Since the early morning today the coalition high command and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in an online conference joined by the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. This meeting immediately follows an earlier meeting last night at the White House. During the night meeting with President Bush emergency actions were outlined to resolve the standstill in Iraq. The existing course of actions is viewed as "ineffective and leading to a crisis". The Secretary of State Collin Powell warned that, if the war in Iraq continues for more than a month, it might lead to unpredictable consequences in international politics.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Mayers reported on the proposed actions and corrections to the plan of the operation in Iraq. George Bush demanded that the military breaks the standstill in Iraq and within a week achieves significant military progress. A particular attention, according to Bush, should be paid to finding and eliminating the top Iraqi political and military leadership. Bush believes that Saddam Hussein and his closest aides are the cornerstone of the Iraqi defense.
During today's online meeting at the coalition headquarters Gen. Franks was criticized for inefficient command of his troops and for his inability to concentrate available forces on the main tasks.
According to [Russian military] intelligence Pentagon made a decision to significantly reinforce the coalition. During the next two weeks up to 50,000 troops and no less than 500 tanks will arrive to the combat area from the US military bases in Germany and Albania. By the end of April 120,000 more troops and up to 1,200 additional tanks will be sent to support the war against Iraq.
A decision was made to change the way aviation is used in this war. The use of precision-guided munitions will be scaled down and these weapons will be reserved for attacking only known, confirmed targets. There will be an increase in the use of conventional high-yield aviation bombs, volume-detonation bombs and incendiary munitions. The USAF command is ordered to deliver to airbases used against Iraq a two-week supply of aviation bombs of 1-tonn caliber and higher as well as volume-detonation and incendiary bombs. This means that Washington is resorting to the "scorched earth" tactics and carpet-bombing campaign
Aeronautics.ru: War in Iraq - fighting the people
-Basra immer noch nicht unter Kontrolle
-An-Nasiriya noch nicht unter Kontrolle
-Bis zu 20 Aufklärungs Teams der Iraker hinter Koalitions Linien
-Sandstürme beschädigen über 100 Fahrzeuge der "Koalitions-Armee"
-Kirkuk nicht unter Kontrolle
-Keine Kurdische unterstützung im Nordirak
-Alle schon vor dem Krieg ausgemachten Ziele wurden zwischen 3 und 7 mal Bombardiert. Ohne Effekt auf die Irakische Armee
-nachschub von precision-guided missiles um ein drittel reduziert
March 25, 2003, 1230hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - As of the morning March 25 the situation on Iraqi fronts remains quiet. Both sides are actively preparing for future engagements. Exhausted in combat the US 3rd Motorized Infantry Division is now being reinforced with fresh units from Kuwait (presumably with up to 1 Marine brigade and 1 tank brigade from the 1st Armored Division (all coming from the coalition command reserves) and elements of the British 7th Tank Brigade from the area of Umm Qasr. The troops have a stringent requirement to regroup and, after conducting additional reconnaissance, to capture An-Nasiriya within two days.
The Iraqis have reinforced the An-Nasiriya garrison with several artillery battalions and a large number of anti-tank weapons. Additionally, the Iraqis are actively deploying landmines along the approaches to their positions.
However, currently all combat has nearly ceased due to the sand storm raging over the region. Weather forecasts anticipate the storm's end by noon of March 26. According to intercepted radio communications the coalition advance will be tied to the end of the sand storm and is planned to take place during the night of March 26-27. The coalition command believes that a night attack will allow its forces to achieve the element of surprise and to use its advantage in specialized night fighting equipment.
There have been no reports of any losses resulting from direct combat in the past 10 hours. However, there is information about two coalition combat vehicles destroyed by landmines. Three US soldiers were wounded in one of these incidents.
Positional warfare continues near Basra. The coalition forces in this area are clearly insufficient for continuing the attack and the main emphasis is being placed on artillery and aviation. The city is under constant bombardment but so far this had little impact on the combat readiness of the Iraqi units. Thus, last night an Iraqi battalion reinforced with tanks swung around the coalition positions in the area of Basra airport and attacked the coalition forces in the flanks. As the result of this attack the US forces have been thrown back 1.5-2 kilometers leaving the airport and the nearby structures in the hands of the Iraqis. Two APCs and one tank were destroyed in this encounter. According to radio intelligence at least two US soldiers were killed and no less than six US soldiers were wounded.
The coalition forces are still unable to completely capture the small town of Umm Qasr. By the end of yesterday coalition units were controlling only the strategic roads going through the town, but fierce fighting continued in the residential districts. At least two British servicemen were killed by sniper fire in Umm Qasr during the past 24 hours.
The coalition command is extremely concerned with growing resistance movement in the rear of the advancing forces. During a meeting at the coalition command headquarters it was reported that up to 20 Iraqi reconnaissance units are active behind the coalition rear. The Iraqis attack lightly armed supply units; they deploy landmines and conduct reconnaissance. Additionally, captured villages have active armed resistance that is conducting reconnaissance in the interests of the Iraqi command and is organizing attacks against coalition troops. During the past 24 hours more than 30 coalition wheeled and armored vehicles have been lost to such attacks. Some 7 coalition servicemen are missing, 3 soldiers are dead and 10 are wounded.
The coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks ordered his forces to clear coalition rears from Iraqi diversionary units and partisans in the shortest possible time. The British side will be responsible for fulfilling these orders. A unit from the 22nd SAS regiment supported by the US 1st, 5th and 10th Special Operations Groups will carry out this operation. Each of these groups has up to 12 units numbering 12-15 troops each. All of these units have some Asian or Arabic Americans. The groups also have guides and translators from among local Iraqi collaborators, who went through rapid training at specialized centers in the Czech Republic and in the UK.
The sand storms turned out to be the main enemy of the American military equipment. Just the 3rd Motorized Infantry Division had more than 100 vehicles disabled. This is causing serious concern on the part of the coalition command. The repair crews are working around the clock to return all the disabled equipment back into service. The M1A2 Abrams tanks are not known for the their reliable engines as it is, but in the sand storm conditions multiple breakdowns became a real problem for the tank crews.
All attempts by the US paratroopers to capture the town of Kirkuk have yielded no result. The Americans counted on the support of the Kurds but the latter refused to take a direct part in the attack and demanded guarantees from the US command that it will prevent a Turkish invasion. The Turkish themselves are avoiding making any promises.
Additionally, the situation [at Kirkuk] is affected by the lack of heavy weapons on the part of the US paratroopers. The aviation support alone is clearly not sufficient. The northern group of forces commander Marine Brig. Gen. Osman has requested artillery and armored vehicles.
All indications are that so far the US is unable to form a combat-capable strike force in this area.
According to satellite reconnaissance it seems likely that the Iraqis had time to remove the captured Apache Longbow attack helicopter of the 11th Aviation Regiment. The pieces remaining at the landing site following a US bombing strike indicate that the bombs hit a crudely constructed mockup.
Aerial bombardment of Baghdad has so far failed to produce the expected results. All targets designated before the war have been hit 3 to 7 times, but this had almost no effect on the combat readiness of the Iraqi army, their air defenses or the command and control structures.
It seems that during preparation for the war the Iraqis were able to create new, well-protected communication lines and control centers. There is plenty of intelligence information indicating that so far the US electronic reconnaissance was unable to locate and to penetrate the Iraqi command's communication network, which is an indication of the network's high technological sophistication.
A particular point of concern for the US command is the huge overuse of precision-guided munitions and cruise missiles. Already the supply of heavy cruise missiles like the "Tomahawk" has been reduced by a third and, at the current rate of use, in three weeks the US will be left only with the untouchable strategic supply of these missiles. A similar situation exists with other types of precision-guided munitions. "The rate of their use is incompatible with the obtained results. We are literally dropping gold into the mud!" said Gen. Richard Mayers during a meeting in Pentagon yesterday morning. [reverse translation from Russian]
The US experts already call this war a "crisis". "It was enough for the enemy to show a little resistance and some creative thinking as our technological superiority begun to quickly lose all its meaning. Our expenses are not justified by the obtained results. The enemy is using an order of magnitude cheaper weapons to reach the same goals for which we spend billions on technological whims of the defense industry!" said Gen. Stanley McCrystal during the same Pentagon meeting. [reverse translation from Russian]
Since the early morning today the coalition high command and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in an online conference joined by the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. This meeting immediately follows an earlier meeting last night at the White House. During the night meeting with President Bush emergency actions were outlined to resolve the standstill in Iraq. The existing course of actions is viewed as "ineffective and leading to a crisis". The Secretary of State Collin Powell warned that, if the war in Iraq continues for more than a month, it might lead to unpredictable consequences in international politics.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Mayers reported on the proposed actions and corrections to the plan of the operation in Iraq. George Bush demanded that the military breaks the standstill in Iraq and within a week achieves significant military progress. A particular attention, according to Bush, should be paid to finding and eliminating the top Iraqi political and military leadership. Bush believes that Saddam Hussein and his closest aides are the cornerstone of the Iraqi defense.
During today's online meeting at the coalition headquarters Gen. Franks was criticized for inefficient command of his troops and for his inability to concentrate available forces on the main tasks.
According to [Russian military] intelligence Pentagon made a decision to significantly reinforce the coalition. During the next two weeks up to 50,000 troops and no less than 500 tanks will arrive to the combat area from the US military bases in Germany and Albania. By the end of April 120,000 more troops and up to 1,200 additional tanks will be sent to support the war against Iraq.
A decision was made to change the way aviation is used in this war. The use of precision-guided munitions will be scaled down and these weapons will be reserved for attacking only known, confirmed targets. There will be an increase in the use of conventional high-yield aviation bombs, volume-detonation bombs and incendiary munitions. The USAF command is ordered to deliver to airbases used against Iraq a two-week supply of aviation bombs of 1-tonn caliber and higher as well as volume-detonation and incendiary bombs. This means that Washington is resorting to the "scorched earth" tactics and carpet-bombing campaign
WAR ON IRAK CENSORED
Ny Times: MTV Is Wary of Videos on War
Though images of war are dominating television screens, one channel is not having it. The day after the war in Iraq started, a memo was distributed through the offices of MTV Europe by its broadcast standards department.
In the memo, Mark Sunderland, one of the department's managers, recommends that music videos depicting "war, soldiers, war planes, bombs, missiles, riots and social unrest, executions" and "other obviously sensitive material" not be shown on MTV in Britain and elsewhere in Europe until further notice.
The memo cites explicit examples. These include videos that relate directly to the war in Iraq, like "Boom!" by System of a Down; videos with bombs exploding, like Billy Idol's "Hot in the City"; videos with war scenes, like Radiohead's "Lucky"; and even Aerosmith's "Don't Want to Miss a Thing," which has scenes from the action movie "Armageddon."
Taking further cautionary measures, the memo goes on to advise against showing videos in which lyrics, song titles or even band names allude to war, bombs or other "sensitive words." It mentions the songs "B.O.B (Bombs Over Baghdad)" by Outkast; "You, Me and World War Three" by Gavin Friday; and anything by the B-52's.
"I guess MTV doesn't have a research department, because from Day 1 we've said in interviews that our name is a slang term for the bouffant hairdo Kate and Cindy used to wear — nothing to do with bombers, " said Fred Schneider of the B-52's, referring to fellow band members.
Oddly, the memo also mentions "Invasion" by Radiohead, although a spokesman for the band said he was unaware of any song by the group with that title.
Serj Tankian, the singer in the hard rock band System of a Down, said that MTV in Britain was not showing his band's new video, "Boom!," but that MTV in the United States was. (The MTV spokeswoman confirmed this.) The video was directed by the Oscar-winning documentary maker Michael Moore and shows scenes of peace marches around the world. Meanwhile, Mr. Tankian said, the music-video network MuchMusic in Canada is showing "Boom!," but MuchMusic USA is not
Ny Times: MTV Is Wary of Videos on War
Though images of war are dominating television screens, one channel is not having it. The day after the war in Iraq started, a memo was distributed through the offices of MTV Europe by its broadcast standards department.
In the memo, Mark Sunderland, one of the department's managers, recommends that music videos depicting "war, soldiers, war planes, bombs, missiles, riots and social unrest, executions" and "other obviously sensitive material" not be shown on MTV in Britain and elsewhere in Europe until further notice.
The memo cites explicit examples. These include videos that relate directly to the war in Iraq, like "Boom!" by System of a Down; videos with bombs exploding, like Billy Idol's "Hot in the City"; videos with war scenes, like Radiohead's "Lucky"; and even Aerosmith's "Don't Want to Miss a Thing," which has scenes from the action movie "Armageddon."
Taking further cautionary measures, the memo goes on to advise against showing videos in which lyrics, song titles or even band names allude to war, bombs or other "sensitive words." It mentions the songs "B.O.B (Bombs Over Baghdad)" by Outkast; "You, Me and World War Three" by Gavin Friday; and anything by the B-52's.
"I guess MTV doesn't have a research department, because from Day 1 we've said in interviews that our name is a slang term for the bouffant hairdo Kate and Cindy used to wear — nothing to do with bombers, " said Fred Schneider of the B-52's, referring to fellow band members.
Oddly, the memo also mentions "Invasion" by Radiohead, although a spokesman for the band said he was unaware of any song by the group with that title.
Serj Tankian, the singer in the hard rock band System of a Down, said that MTV in Britain was not showing his band's new video, "Boom!," but that MTV in the United States was. (The MTV spokeswoman confirmed this.) The video was directed by the Oscar-winning documentary maker Michael Moore and shows scenes of peace marches around the world. Meanwhile, Mr. Tankian said, the music-video network MuchMusic in Canada is showing "Boom!," but MuchMusic USA is not
WAR ON IRAK
Corp-Watch: Halliburton Makes a Killing on Iraq War
Cheney's Former Company Profits from Supporting Troops
As the first bombs rain down on Baghdad, CorpWatch has learned that thousands of employees of Halliburton, Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, are working alongside US troops in Kuwait and Turkey under a package deal worth close to a billion dollars. According to US Army sources, they are building tent cities and providing logistical support for the war in Iraq in addition to other hot spots in the "war on terrorism."
Corp-Watch: Halliburton Makes a Killing on Iraq War
Cheney's Former Company Profits from Supporting Troops
As the first bombs rain down on Baghdad, CorpWatch has learned that thousands of employees of Halliburton, Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, are working alongside US troops in Kuwait and Turkey under a package deal worth close to a billion dollars. According to US Army sources, they are building tent cities and providing logistical support for the war in Iraq in addition to other hot spots in the "war on terrorism."
WAR ON IRAK CENSORED
PR WATCH: English regional newspapers start war censorship
English regional newspapers start war censorship
Sir Ray Tindle, the editor in chief of over 100 weekly newspapers across
Britain has informed all his editors that they can no longer report any
anti-war stories in their newspapers. Sir Ray, who has been knighted for
his services to the newspaper industry, wrote:
"Everyone knows that Tindle family newspapers have no political bias.
Our columns are free. When British troops come under fire, however, as
now seems probable, I ask you to ensure that nothing appears in the
columns if your newspapers which attacks the decision to conduct the war
in which those men are involved, nor, of course, anything which attacks
the troops themselves".
"I ask it", wrote Tindle, "not just as a proprietor of the newspapers,
but as someone who served as a British soldier from 1944 to 1947 in the
Far East".
His editors back Tindle's decision. Gina Coles who edits eight of his
titles in the south west of the country said: "I am proud to say I
totally agree with his decision. Once war was declared anti-war
demonstrations were pointless - the argument was lost". Coles though
does admit that Tindle's "brave" move could be seen by some as
"censoring the news".
Jeremy Dear, the General Secretary of the National Union of Journalists
has condemned the move: " So much for the right to know, free speech and
all those other rights which our forefathers fought to establish and
which Sir Ray Tindle seeks to demolish at the stroke of a pen.
"What makes his censorship better than the censorship of those he would
seek to condemn?" asks Dear, "He merely confirms that freedom of the
press really only belongs to those who own the press - the rest of us
will be allowed to know only what they deem is suitable. Next stop
tyranny?"
PR WATCH: English regional newspapers start war censorship
English regional newspapers start war censorship
Sir Ray Tindle, the editor in chief of over 100 weekly newspapers across
Britain has informed all his editors that they can no longer report any
anti-war stories in their newspapers. Sir Ray, who has been knighted for
his services to the newspaper industry, wrote:
"Everyone knows that Tindle family newspapers have no political bias.
Our columns are free. When British troops come under fire, however, as
now seems probable, I ask you to ensure that nothing appears in the
columns if your newspapers which attacks the decision to conduct the war
in which those men are involved, nor, of course, anything which attacks
the troops themselves".
"I ask it", wrote Tindle, "not just as a proprietor of the newspapers,
but as someone who served as a British soldier from 1944 to 1947 in the
Far East".
His editors back Tindle's decision. Gina Coles who edits eight of his
titles in the south west of the country said: "I am proud to say I
totally agree with his decision. Once war was declared anti-war
demonstrations were pointless - the argument was lost". Coles though
does admit that Tindle's "brave" move could be seen by some as
"censoring the news".
Jeremy Dear, the General Secretary of the National Union of Journalists
has condemned the move: " So much for the right to know, free speech and
all those other rights which our forefathers fought to establish and
which Sir Ray Tindle seeks to demolish at the stroke of a pen.
"What makes his censorship better than the censorship of those he would
seek to condemn?" asks Dear, "He merely confirms that freedom of the
press really only belongs to those who own the press - the rest of us
will be allowed to know only what they deem is suitable. Next stop
tyranny?"
WAR ON IRAK
The New Yorker: WHO LIED TO WHOM? by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq’s nuclear program?
Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq’s weapons capability. It was an important presentation for the Bush Administration. Some Democrats were publicly questioning the President’s claim that Iraq still possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an immediate threat to the United States. Just the day before, former Vice-President Al Gore had sharply criticized the Administration’s advocacy of preëmptive war, calling it a doctrine that would replace “a world in which states consider themselves subject to law” with “the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the President of the United States.” A few Democrats were also considering putting an alternative resolution before Congress.
According to two of those present at the briefing, which was highly classified and took place in the committee’s secure hearing room, Tenet declared, as he had done before, that a shipment of high-strength aluminum tubes that was intercepted on its way to Iraq had been meant for the construction of centrifuges that could be used to produce enriched uranium. The suitability of the tubes for that purpose had been disputed, but this time the argument that Iraq had a nuclear program under way was buttressed by a new and striking fact: the C.I.A. had recently received intelligence showing that, between 1999 and 2001, Iraq had attempted to buy five hundred tons of uranium oxide from Niger, one of the world’s largest producers. The uranium, known as “yellow cake,” can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors; if processed differently, it can also be enriched to make weapons. Five tons can produce enough weapon-grade uranium for a bomb. (When the C.I.A. spokesman William Harlow was asked for comment, he denied that Tenet had briefed the senators on Niger.)
"CHECK IT"
The New Yorker: WHO LIED TO WHOM? by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq’s nuclear program?
Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq’s weapons capability. It was an important presentation for the Bush Administration. Some Democrats were publicly questioning the President’s claim that Iraq still possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an immediate threat to the United States. Just the day before, former Vice-President Al Gore had sharply criticized the Administration’s advocacy of preëmptive war, calling it a doctrine that would replace “a world in which states consider themselves subject to law” with “the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the President of the United States.” A few Democrats were also considering putting an alternative resolution before Congress.
According to two of those present at the briefing, which was highly classified and took place in the committee’s secure hearing room, Tenet declared, as he had done before, that a shipment of high-strength aluminum tubes that was intercepted on its way to Iraq had been meant for the construction of centrifuges that could be used to produce enriched uranium. The suitability of the tubes for that purpose had been disputed, but this time the argument that Iraq had a nuclear program under way was buttressed by a new and striking fact: the C.I.A. had recently received intelligence showing that, between 1999 and 2001, Iraq had attempted to buy five hundred tons of uranium oxide from Niger, one of the world’s largest producers. The uranium, known as “yellow cake,” can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors; if processed differently, it can also be enriched to make weapons. Five tons can produce enough weapon-grade uranium for a bomb. (When the C.I.A. spokesman William Harlow was asked for comment, he denied that Tenet had briefed the senators on Niger.)
"CHECK IT"
WAR ON IRAK-PROPAGANDA
PR-Week: White House prepares to feed 24-hour news cycle
WASHINGTON: The eruption of war in Iraq last week set in motion a massive global PR network, cultivated by the Bush administration during the months-long buildup of forces.
The network is intended not only to disseminate, but also to dominate news of the conflict around the world.
Before the attacks began, Suzy DeFrancis, deputy assistant to President Bush for communications, outlined the daily media relations hand-off that was about to begin.
"When Americans wake up in the morning, they will first hear from the (Persian Gulf) region, maybe from General Tommy Franks," she said. "Then later in the day, they'll hear from the Pentagon, then the State Department, then later on the White House will brief."
Before anyone goes on air, however, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer will set the day's message with an early-morning conference call to British counterpart Alastair Campbell, White House communications director Dan Bartlett, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, Pentagon spokesperson Torie Clarke, and White House Office of Global Communication (OGC) director Tucker Eskew - a routine that mirrors procedure during the conflict in Afghanistan.
PR-Week: White House prepares to feed 24-hour news cycle
WASHINGTON: The eruption of war in Iraq last week set in motion a massive global PR network, cultivated by the Bush administration during the months-long buildup of forces.
The network is intended not only to disseminate, but also to dominate news of the conflict around the world.
Before the attacks began, Suzy DeFrancis, deputy assistant to President Bush for communications, outlined the daily media relations hand-off that was about to begin.
"When Americans wake up in the morning, they will first hear from the (Persian Gulf) region, maybe from General Tommy Franks," she said. "Then later in the day, they'll hear from the Pentagon, then the State Department, then later on the White House will brief."
Before anyone goes on air, however, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer will set the day's message with an early-morning conference call to British counterpart Alastair Campbell, White House communications director Dan Bartlett, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, Pentagon spokesperson Torie Clarke, and White House Office of Global Communication (OGC) director Tucker Eskew - a routine that mirrors procedure during the conflict in Afghanistan.
WAR ON IRAK
Swissinfo: “Democracy in Iraq will take up to 30 years”
The United States has neither the will nor the ability to bring democracy to Iraq, according to Middle East specialist Arnold Hottinger.
And he warns that if the war is a bloody and protracted one, unrest could spread to neighbouring countries.
Hottinger is a Swiss journalist, acknowledged as one of the country’s foremost experts on Middle East affairs.
He has travelled extensively around the region, making his name as a correspondent for the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” and Swiss radio.
He told swissinfo that the war in Iraq could be over very quickly - within a week at the earliest. But he added it could drag out for as long as a month.
Swissinfo: “Democracy in Iraq will take up to 30 years”
The United States has neither the will nor the ability to bring democracy to Iraq, according to Middle East specialist Arnold Hottinger.
And he warns that if the war is a bloody and protracted one, unrest could spread to neighbouring countries.
Hottinger is a Swiss journalist, acknowledged as one of the country’s foremost experts on Middle East affairs.
He has travelled extensively around the region, making his name as a correspondent for the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” and Swiss radio.
He told swissinfo that the war in Iraq could be over very quickly - within a week at the earliest. But he added it could drag out for as long as a month.
WAR ON IRAK
Pravda: Russian Military Expert: USA Tests Highly Devastating Weapons in Iraq
The USA is testing in Iraq new samples of exceptionally devastating weapons, a Russian military expert said Monday on the condition of anonymity.
According to him, excessive use of force is a very soft word for characterising the USA's and Britain's activities in Iraq. "Bomb strikes at towns and the countryside can be compared only to the devastating power of weapons of mass destruction," said the expert.
In his opinion, the US blows can hardly be called "pinpoint" or "selective" - the latest bombing of Basrah killed 77 peaceful residents, and in Baghdad, bombs and shells hit an orphanage and the university building. Besides, two American Tomahawk cruise missiles fell down on Turkish territory, this preceded by a "unintentional" strike at Iran.
The expert drew attention to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's statement that Baghdad is violating international law by an alleged misuse of the civilians as a live shield.
"Rumsfeld has meanwhile ignored," continued the expert, "that the American aviation is violating the same norms by bombing the population in places of permanent residence."
Pravda: Russian Military Expert: USA Tests Highly Devastating Weapons in Iraq
The USA is testing in Iraq new samples of exceptionally devastating weapons, a Russian military expert said Monday on the condition of anonymity.
According to him, excessive use of force is a very soft word for characterising the USA's and Britain's activities in Iraq. "Bomb strikes at towns and the countryside can be compared only to the devastating power of weapons of mass destruction," said the expert.
In his opinion, the US blows can hardly be called "pinpoint" or "selective" - the latest bombing of Basrah killed 77 peaceful residents, and in Baghdad, bombs and shells hit an orphanage and the university building. Besides, two American Tomahawk cruise missiles fell down on Turkish territory, this preceded by a "unintentional" strike at Iran.
The expert drew attention to US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's statement that Baghdad is violating international law by an alleged misuse of the civilians as a live shield.
"Rumsfeld has meanwhile ignored," continued the expert, "that the American aviation is violating the same norms by bombing the population in places of permanent residence."
WAR ON IRAK
al-jazeera.net: British offices bombed in Lebanon and Ecuador
An explosion damaged part of the British Council building in Beirut in
the
early hours of this morning. One source claims that a small bomb
weighing
about 400 grams, was placed on one of the building's walls. Police said
the
explosion caused only light damage. They have begun an investigation
al-jazeera.net: British offices bombed in Lebanon and Ecuador
An explosion damaged part of the British Council building in Beirut in
the
early hours of this morning. One source claims that a small bomb
weighing
about 400 grams, was placed on one of the building's walls. Police said
the
explosion caused only light damage. They have begun an investigation
WAR ON IRAK
The Age: US awards first post-war reconstruction contract
The United States today awarded a $US4.8 million contract to manage the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, recently seized and tenuously-held by invading US and British troops.
The US Agency for International Development said the contract, the second to be awarded after Washington sought contracts from a select group of US firms was awarded to the Seattle, Washington-based Stevedoring Services of America (SSA).
The Age: US awards first post-war reconstruction contract
The United States today awarded a $US4.8 million contract to manage the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, recently seized and tenuously-held by invading US and British troops.
The US Agency for International Development said the contract, the second to be awarded after Washington sought contracts from a select group of US firms was awarded to the Seattle, Washington-based Stevedoring Services of America (SSA).
WAR ON IRAK
Guardian: Brown rejects US bid for Iraqi cash
The chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, is unwilling to comply with a US demand that he should turn over £200m Iraqi assets frozen in Britain to an American-controlled account.
Britain wants the UN to control the funds, which have been frozen since the first Gulf war began 12 years ago.
The Treasury said yesterday that Mr Brown has been in talks with his US opposite number, the treasury secretary John Snow, and wanted the money to be "used for the benefit and welfare of the Iraqi people".
Cash totalling more than £400m has been frozen in British bank accounts under UN resolutions since 1990.
The British stance is that both in the UK and the Cayman Islands, which have also been the subject of a US demand, there is no legal authority to hand the cash over to the US
The Swiss bank UBS said yesterday that it would hand over some money in blocked accounts at its US branches.
"The funds stem from payments of US oil companies to Iraqi ones for deliveries ahead of the implementation of sanctions against Iraq in 1990," its spokesman Serge Steiner said.
But officials in Switzerland said they would be unable to hand over $364m from Swiss accounts without a security council resolution.
Guardian: Brown rejects US bid for Iraqi cash
The chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, is unwilling to comply with a US demand that he should turn over £200m Iraqi assets frozen in Britain to an American-controlled account.
Britain wants the UN to control the funds, which have been frozen since the first Gulf war began 12 years ago.
The Treasury said yesterday that Mr Brown has been in talks with his US opposite number, the treasury secretary John Snow, and wanted the money to be "used for the benefit and welfare of the Iraqi people".
Cash totalling more than £400m has been frozen in British bank accounts under UN resolutions since 1990.
The British stance is that both in the UK and the Cayman Islands, which have also been the subject of a US demand, there is no legal authority to hand the cash over to the US
The Swiss bank UBS said yesterday that it would hand over some money in blocked accounts at its US branches.
"The funds stem from payments of US oil companies to Iraqi ones for deliveries ahead of the implementation of sanctions against Iraq in 1990," its spokesman Serge Steiner said.
But officials in Switzerland said they would be unable to hand over $364m from Swiss accounts without a security council resolution.
WAR ON IRAK
IHT: Marines embroiled in urban warfare after all
NASIRIYA, Iraq As American marines battled their way into the heart of
this
city Monday, they appeared to be stepping into just the sort of urban
imbroglio they have been hoping to avoid. Following heavy fighting
Sunday,
when at least 10 Americans were killed near here, the battle that
unfolded
Monday had all the hallmarks of a confused and chaotic urban shootout.
Helicopter gunships rocketed the city from above, and Nasiriya’s
residents claimed the raids had killed and injured scores of civilians.
This claim was impossible to verify in the chaos of the fighting today.
"Iraker sterben in den Medien nicht oder nur möglicherweise. Es konnte leider nicht unabhängig bestätigt werden"
IHT: Marines embroiled in urban warfare after all
NASIRIYA, Iraq As American marines battled their way into the heart of
this
city Monday, they appeared to be stepping into just the sort of urban
imbroglio they have been hoping to avoid. Following heavy fighting
Sunday,
when at least 10 Americans were killed near here, the battle that
unfolded
Monday had all the hallmarks of a confused and chaotic urban shootout.
Helicopter gunships rocketed the city from above, and Nasiriya’s
residents claimed the raids had killed and injured scores of civilians.
This claim was impossible to verify in the chaos of the fighting today.
"Iraker sterben in den Medien nicht oder nur möglicherweise. Es konnte leider nicht unabhängig bestätigt werden"
WAR ON IRAK
Swissinfo: Iraq accuses U.S. and Britain of blocking relief
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq has accused the United States and Britain of forcing the United Nations
to stop a vital relief programme, which allowed the country's 25 million people to receive food and
medicine in return for oil sales.
"We denounce this immoral and inhuman behaviour by the United States and Britain to block the
oil-for-food programme," Iraq's Trade Minister Mohammed Mehdi Saleh told a news conference on Tuesday.
He said U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan had submitted to pressure from the United States and
Britain, who are launching a war against Iraq to oust President Saddam Hussein
Swissinfo: Iraq accuses U.S. and Britain of blocking relief
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq has accused the United States and Britain of forcing the United Nations
to stop a vital relief programme, which allowed the country's 25 million people to receive food and
medicine in return for oil sales.
"We denounce this immoral and inhuman behaviour by the United States and Britain to block the
oil-for-food programme," Iraq's Trade Minister Mohammed Mehdi Saleh told a news conference on Tuesday.
He said U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan had submitted to pressure from the United States and
Britain, who are launching a war against Iraq to oust President Saddam Hussein
WAR ON IRAK
How did the U.S. end up taking on Saddam? The inside story of how Iraq jumped to the top of Bush's agenda—and why the outcome there may foreshadow a different world order. By Michael Elliott and James Carney
Time Magazine: First Stop, Iraq
F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.....
CHECK IT
How did the U.S. end up taking on Saddam? The inside story of how Iraq jumped to the top of Bush's agenda—and why the outcome there may foreshadow a different world order. By Michael Elliott and James Carney
Time Magazine: First Stop, Iraq
F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.....
CHECK IT
OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
ZMAG: Rachel Corrie's Mother Speaks Out
ON MARCH 16, 23-year old Rachel Corrie, a Palestinian rights activist working with the International Solidarity Movement, stood in front of an Israeli bulldozer in the city of Rafah in Gaza.
For three hours, there had been a standoff, as Rachel and others blocked the bulldozer from demolishing a Palestinian home. Activists at the scene say that the driver of the bulldozer knew that Rachel was in front of him--and deliberately drove toward her.
Initially, he covered her in sand and other heavy debris on her. Then the bulldozer pushed Rachel to the ground and drove over her--then went into reverse to drive over her again. Rachel’s arms, legs and skull were fractured. She died in an ambulance on the way to the hospital.
As if to underline Israel’s contempt for Palestinians and anyone who supports them, a few days later, soldiers threw stun grenades and tear gas canisters at a group of Palestinian and international activists gathered for a memorial service at the spot where Rachel was crushed.
Joseph Smith, a student from Missouri, said the group had gathered to lay carnations and plant a tree, when Israeli armored personnel carriers moved in. "They started firing tear gas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades," Smith told a reporter. Later, while some of the 100 remained at the spot, Israeli forces drove by in another convoy--including the very bulldozer that had crushed Rachel to death.
Here, Rachel's mother, Cindy, talks to Socialist Worker’s GANESH LAL.
ZMAG: Rachel Corrie's Mother Speaks Out
ON MARCH 16, 23-year old Rachel Corrie, a Palestinian rights activist working with the International Solidarity Movement, stood in front of an Israeli bulldozer in the city of Rafah in Gaza.
For three hours, there had been a standoff, as Rachel and others blocked the bulldozer from demolishing a Palestinian home. Activists at the scene say that the driver of the bulldozer knew that Rachel was in front of him--and deliberately drove toward her.
Initially, he covered her in sand and other heavy debris on her. Then the bulldozer pushed Rachel to the ground and drove over her--then went into reverse to drive over her again. Rachel’s arms, legs and skull were fractured. She died in an ambulance on the way to the hospital.
As if to underline Israel’s contempt for Palestinians and anyone who supports them, a few days later, soldiers threw stun grenades and tear gas canisters at a group of Palestinian and international activists gathered for a memorial service at the spot where Rachel was crushed.
Joseph Smith, a student from Missouri, said the group had gathered to lay carnations and plant a tree, when Israeli armored personnel carriers moved in. "They started firing tear gas and blowing smoke, then they fired sound grenades," Smith told a reporter. Later, while some of the 100 remained at the spot, Israeli forces drove by in another convoy--including the very bulldozer that had crushed Rachel to death.
Here, Rachel's mother, Cindy, talks to Socialist Worker’s GANESH LAL.
WAR ON IRAK - RUSSIA
Pravda: Will American Administration Declare War on Russia?
US officials think that Russia is guilty of their unsuccessful war
It is obvious today that the war in Iraq is not the kind of war that the American administration was intended to have. The strong resistance that Iraqi troops showed, Iraqi ABM systems and anti-tank facilities turned out to be an unexpected surprise for Americans.
As the American administration believed, the war turned out to be difficult on account of the fact that the Russian defense industry delivered anti-tank missiles to Iraq via third countries. As it was said, the Russian defense industry also supplied Iraq with night vision devices, and unique Kolchuga anti-missile systems. The US administration determined that Russia delivered those weapons to Iraq several days before the war was launched. The official note of protest on the part of the US Department of State was based on those illegal deliveries. The note of protest was handed over to the Russian ambassador to the USA, Yury Ushakov.
Pravda: Will American Administration Declare War on Russia?
US officials think that Russia is guilty of their unsuccessful war
It is obvious today that the war in Iraq is not the kind of war that the American administration was intended to have. The strong resistance that Iraqi troops showed, Iraqi ABM systems and anti-tank facilities turned out to be an unexpected surprise for Americans.
As the American administration believed, the war turned out to be difficult on account of the fact that the Russian defense industry delivered anti-tank missiles to Iraq via third countries. As it was said, the Russian defense industry also supplied Iraq with night vision devices, and unique Kolchuga anti-missile systems. The US administration determined that Russia delivered those weapons to Iraq several days before the war was launched. The official note of protest on the part of the US Department of State was based on those illegal deliveries. The note of protest was handed over to the Russian ambassador to the USA, Yury Ushakov.
AFGHANISTAN
Reuters: U.S. Military Expands Afghan Operation
25.03.03 BAGRAM, Afghanistan (Reuters) - Hundreds of U.S. soldiers launched an air assault on Tuesday as a major operation to hunt down Taliban and al Qaeda fugitives expanded in southern Afghanistan, a military spokesman said.
The operation, which started at the same time as the war in Iraq last Thursday, is being carried out in the former Taliban stronghold of Kandahar province with up to 100 men targeted, said U.S. military spokesman Colonel Roger King.
He said another large cache of arms, the third since the operation began, was found as U.S. troops swept through the eastern part of the province,
Coalition forces conducted an air assault in the Samighar mountains on Tuesday in support of Operation Valiant Strike, King told a news briefing at U.S. headquarters in Bagram Air Base, just north of Kabul.
Thousands of U.S. and allied troops are searching Afghanistan for Osama bin Laden and members of his al Qaeda network, prime suspects in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, as well as leaders of the Taliban regime that sheltered them.
Reuters: U.S. Military Expands Afghan Operation
25.03.03 BAGRAM, Afghanistan (Reuters) - Hundreds of U.S. soldiers launched an air assault on Tuesday as a major operation to hunt down Taliban and al Qaeda fugitives expanded in southern Afghanistan, a military spokesman said.
The operation, which started at the same time as the war in Iraq last Thursday, is being carried out in the former Taliban stronghold of Kandahar province with up to 100 men targeted, said U.S. military spokesman Colonel Roger King.
He said another large cache of arms, the third since the operation began, was found as U.S. troops swept through the eastern part of the province,
Coalition forces conducted an air assault in the Samighar mountains on Tuesday in support of Operation Valiant Strike, King told a news briefing at U.S. headquarters in Bagram Air Base, just north of Kabul.
Thousands of U.S. and allied troops are searching Afghanistan for Osama bin Laden and members of his al Qaeda network, prime suspects in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, as well as leaders of the Taliban regime that sheltered them.
WAR ON IRAK
al-jazeera: Arab League demands withdrawal of US-led forces
Arab foreign ministers condemned on Monday the “aggression” against
Iraq and called for the “immediate and unconditional withdrawal” of
“invasion forces” from the country. The resolution issued at the end of
their meeting in Cairo also called on “all Arab states to abstain from
participating in any military action damaging the unity and territorial
integrity of Iraq or any other Arab country.”
al-jazeera: Arab League demands withdrawal of US-led forces
Arab foreign ministers condemned on Monday the “aggression” against
Iraq and called for the “immediate and unconditional withdrawal” of
“invasion forces” from the country. The resolution issued at the end of
their meeting in Cairo also called on “all Arab states to abstain from
participating in any military action damaging the unity and territorial
integrity of Iraq or any other Arab country.”
WAR ON IRAK
Pravda: US blames its setbacks on outdated Russian weapons
American army reversals in pursing the Iraqi "Blitzkrieg" are mutely resented in Washington. The White House is looking for causes of its strategic and tactical blunders not in miscalculations when preparing the Shock and Awe operation, nor in the political and military underestimation of the defence capabilities of Baghdad and its forces, but, as is their wont in such cases, in secondary and tertiary circumstances, which, all of a sudden, if only for propaganda purposes, become the most salient and move almost to the foreground.
One of such circumstances was Russian weaponry used by Iraqi units. Last weekend the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., Yuri Ushakov, was summoned to the Department of State and handed a note of protest. The note claims that over the past year, Russian private companies have sold to Iraq anti-tank missiles and shells, night-vision devices and electronic equipment able to lead astray American aircraft, cruise and self-homing missiles. All these deals, the note asserts, were done in violation of UN sanctions.
"Such equipment may pose a direct threat to the Coalition's armed forces," says the protest note. "Russia has the last chance to stop supplies". Otherwise Washington would be compelled to take adequate measures.
And although, as claimed by news agencies, the note does not point a finger at concrete Russian defence firms breaching UN sanctions, some are named in the American Washington Post and the British Financial Times - Tula Design Office of Instrument Building (KBP) and Aviakonversia.
Aviakonversia designs and manufactures active jamming stations to suppress receivers of satellite navigational systems used by the Americans to guide cruise missiles and other high-precision weapons. Its director, Oleg Antonov, has said in a RIA Novosti interview that "we supplied no equipment to Iraq," and that "the Iraqis could develop such devices by their own efforts or purchase in third countries".
Pravda: US blames its setbacks on outdated Russian weapons
American army reversals in pursing the Iraqi "Blitzkrieg" are mutely resented in Washington. The White House is looking for causes of its strategic and tactical blunders not in miscalculations when preparing the Shock and Awe operation, nor in the political and military underestimation of the defence capabilities of Baghdad and its forces, but, as is their wont in such cases, in secondary and tertiary circumstances, which, all of a sudden, if only for propaganda purposes, become the most salient and move almost to the foreground.
One of such circumstances was Russian weaponry used by Iraqi units. Last weekend the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., Yuri Ushakov, was summoned to the Department of State and handed a note of protest. The note claims that over the past year, Russian private companies have sold to Iraq anti-tank missiles and shells, night-vision devices and electronic equipment able to lead astray American aircraft, cruise and self-homing missiles. All these deals, the note asserts, were done in violation of UN sanctions.
"Such equipment may pose a direct threat to the Coalition's armed forces," says the protest note. "Russia has the last chance to stop supplies". Otherwise Washington would be compelled to take adequate measures.
And although, as claimed by news agencies, the note does not point a finger at concrete Russian defence firms breaching UN sanctions, some are named in the American Washington Post and the British Financial Times - Tula Design Office of Instrument Building (KBP) and Aviakonversia.
Aviakonversia designs and manufactures active jamming stations to suppress receivers of satellite navigational systems used by the Americans to guide cruise missiles and other high-precision weapons. Its director, Oleg Antonov, has said in a RIA Novosti interview that "we supplied no equipment to Iraq," and that "the Iraqis could develop such devices by their own efforts or purchase in third countries".
WAR ON IRAK
Pakistan Dawn: Coalition forces bogged down at Basra, Nasiriyah: •Progress made on other fronts•US Apache helicopter downed
NASIRIYAH, March 24 (alt): US and British forces were bogged down in fierce battles for the strategic southern Iraqi cities of Nasiriyah and Basra on Monday , despite reassurances from their top commander that they were in fact making "rapid" progress towards Baghdad.
On the fifth day of the US-led invasion, the series of setbacks for the coalition invasion piled up with a climbing body count, tough resistance from fighters and civilians loyal to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and confirmation that a US Apache attack helicopter had been downed south of the Iraqi capital.
British forces assaulting Basra were forced to withdraw to regroup after coming under attack by mortars and by guerillas disguised in civilian clothes. The brigade had at one point surrounded the city. But, with the 180,000-strong Anglo-American force pushing forward in a multi-pronged strategy that involved leapfrogging many points of opposition, there was some progress on other fronts.
Pakistan Dawn: Coalition forces bogged down at Basra, Nasiriyah: •Progress made on other fronts•US Apache helicopter downed
NASIRIYAH, March 24 (alt): US and British forces were bogged down in fierce battles for the strategic southern Iraqi cities of Nasiriyah and Basra on Monday , despite reassurances from their top commander that they were in fact making "rapid" progress towards Baghdad.
On the fifth day of the US-led invasion, the series of setbacks for the coalition invasion piled up with a climbing body count, tough resistance from fighters and civilians loyal to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and confirmation that a US Apache attack helicopter had been downed south of the Iraqi capital.
British forces assaulting Basra were forced to withdraw to regroup after coming under attack by mortars and by guerillas disguised in civilian clothes. The brigade had at one point surrounded the city. But, with the 180,000-strong Anglo-American force pushing forward in a multi-pronged strategy that involved leapfrogging many points of opposition, there was some progress on other fronts.
WAR ON IRAK: CENSORED
Scoop.nz: War Pictures Cause Yellowtimes.Org To Be Shut Down, Again
Somebody doesn't like hearing the truth. Okay, for a second, lets scratch that and choose a slightly less politically charged term. Someone doesn't like to be disputed with alternative views, counterclaims, research and fact. Someone wants you, the reading public, to only gather one-sided, monotone, Orwellian dispatch. News the way they "fashion" it. Or as CNN will have you believe, the "most reliable source for news."
And so, once again, the staff at YellowTimes.org was threatened with a shutdown:
"We are sorry to notify you of suspending your account: Your account has been suspended because [of] inappropriate graphic material."
Within hours, the site was shut down.
What's next? Martial law?
An e-mail hours later was more explanatory: "As 'NO' TV station in the US is allowing any dead US solders or POWs to be displyed (sic) and we will not ether (sic)." Of course, at the time of this e-mail, TV stations across the U.S. were allowing the images of U.S. POWs to be brought to the public's attention.
CNN grilled an Al-Jazeera spokesperson on the (de)merits of airing such footage today. When asked by the Al-Jazeera spokesperson why it was allowed for U.S. stations to broadcast footage of Iraqi POWs, CNN's Aaron Brown said, "because their families wouldn't be watching".
Not true. CNN is broadcast around the world and is available to Iraqis. There are millions of Iraqis living outside Iraq who may recognize an Iraqi POW as a family member.
Not withstanding, to say "their families wouldn't be watching" is not an excuse. If it is a violation on the Iraqi side, then surely, it is as well on the U.S. side.
(Monday's front page of the Washington Post has a picture of an Iraqi POW being handled by U.S. troops.)
Spiegel: Bomben gegen Saddam-TV
Schwerer Rückschlag für die Iraker an der Propaganda-Front. In der vergangenen Nacht zerschossen die Alliierten in Bagdad die TV-Sendeanlagen. Der Befehl dazu kam offenbar von ganz oben: Angeblich hat Präsident Bush selbst die Anweisung gegeben.
Scoop.nz: War Pictures Cause Yellowtimes.Org To Be Shut Down, Again
Somebody doesn't like hearing the truth. Okay, for a second, lets scratch that and choose a slightly less politically charged term. Someone doesn't like to be disputed with alternative views, counterclaims, research and fact. Someone wants you, the reading public, to only gather one-sided, monotone, Orwellian dispatch. News the way they "fashion" it. Or as CNN will have you believe, the "most reliable source for news."
And so, once again, the staff at YellowTimes.org was threatened with a shutdown:
"We are sorry to notify you of suspending your account: Your account has been suspended because [of] inappropriate graphic material."
Within hours, the site was shut down.
What's next? Martial law?
An e-mail hours later was more explanatory: "As 'NO' TV station in the US is allowing any dead US solders or POWs to be displyed (sic) and we will not ether (sic)." Of course, at the time of this e-mail, TV stations across the U.S. were allowing the images of U.S. POWs to be brought to the public's attention.
CNN grilled an Al-Jazeera spokesperson on the (de)merits of airing such footage today. When asked by the Al-Jazeera spokesperson why it was allowed for U.S. stations to broadcast footage of Iraqi POWs, CNN's Aaron Brown said, "because their families wouldn't be watching".
Not true. CNN is broadcast around the world and is available to Iraqis. There are millions of Iraqis living outside Iraq who may recognize an Iraqi POW as a family member.
Not withstanding, to say "their families wouldn't be watching" is not an excuse. If it is a violation on the Iraqi side, then surely, it is as well on the U.S. side.
(Monday's front page of the Washington Post has a picture of an Iraqi POW being handled by U.S. troops.)
Spiegel: Bomben gegen Saddam-TV
Schwerer Rückschlag für die Iraker an der Propaganda-Front. In der vergangenen Nacht zerschossen die Alliierten in Bagdad die TV-Sendeanlagen. Der Befehl dazu kam offenbar von ganz oben: Angeblich hat Präsident Bush selbst die Anweisung gegeben.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)