Red State Renegade

April 27, 2008

Quotes from Iraq Veterans Against the War

Filed under: Iraq, Afghanistan, War on Terror @ 12:04 pm

iraqchild.jpg

Iraq Veterans spoke out last month on what they saw and were expected to do in Iraq and Afghanistan, recalling being put into immoral and illegal situations:

Soldiers spoke out at an event sponsored by Vietnam Veterans Against The War:

On the initial invasion:
“There were massive amounts of artillery strikes before we even invaded. We saw the results of that. Streets full of bodies – women and children – body parts, extremely indiscriminate. I’m talking about rolling through villages here, not military encampments.”

“I still believed everything we were force-fed: weapons of mass destruction and possibly even a nuclear weapon. We felt, like, we’re going to go in, overthrow this evil dictator and give these people some peace, finally. We thought we were doing a good thing.”

On home raids:
“Usually it was based on a tip – we’re told someone in the home is an insurgent. We would pick up people who had nothing to do with anything, keep them locked up until they came up with something.”

“We kick down the door and all we find are a few women holding babies and a couple of kids. We were ordered to take the babies away and put sandbags on the women’s heads, tie their hands behind their backs, put them on their knees facing the wall. Here I am zip-tying these women, and my buddy is standing next to me holding these babies asking what do I do with these kids? We stood there, like, oh shit, what do we do? The squad leader came in and shouted, ‘Everybody is bagged and tagged – everybody!’ So we did it.”

On interrogations:
“That’s not something I want on my conscience.”

On the very common ‘Shovel order:’
“Anyone carrying a shovel or any sort of implement that could be used to bury an IED could be considered a target…After dark, you can shoot anyone who is outside. Or anyone who puts anything on the side of the road can be considered a target. You won’t find it in writing, but it’s an order indicated to soldiers.”

On accountability:
“(Our commander) made it clear to us that if an innocent person was shot he would stage a scene to protect us”.

On the Haditha Massacre, when 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians, some women and children were killed by angry U.S. soldiers, after losing their brothers in an IED attack:
“My squad was doing medivacs out of the town. I was not there to witness the shooting, but I know many marines who were.”

“I have a lot of feelings about this incident. A friend of mine from my first two tours was in that squad. He was the guy they gave immunity to to testify against the squad leader.”

“The people on the ground are looking at serious prison time. Like life. The people who were giving orders were only relieved of command. And I don’t think that’s right.”

The Haditha massacre, us ugly as it sounds, was not an isolated incident:
“It’s the one that just happened to be uncovered.”

On the Abu Gharaib abuses (after describing some inhumane hazing incidents routinely performed on fellow soldiers):
“What happened at Abu Ghraib is those orders came from the top. If the policy makers and the commanders can dehumanise their own troops, why wouldn’t they dehumanise the Iraqi people?”

On the mission and the war against terror:
“Everything that we were doing seemed almost designed to create more terrorists. To turn people against America. I couldn’t understand how we were liberating anyone. But I could understand how an Afghan person who was ambivalent about America could easily become an extremist based on their interaction with American soldiers.”

On the chain of command:
“The soldiers and marines are just doing their jobs, doing what they were trained for or what they were told to do when they got over there. Things that seem really horrible just become routine – and they are implicitly or explicitly condoned, or encouraged, by the commanders and the policy-makers.”

March 4, 2008

Did you hear about Turkey invading Iraq?

Filed under: Iraq, Bush, Troop Surge, Election 2008 @ 10:25 pm

mccain_bush.jpg

As presidential candidate John McCain (shown here searching GWB for WMDs) claims that the U.S. has already succeeded in Iraq, The fact that Turkey launched an invasion of Northern Iraq seems to have escaped the U.S. Media…

Turkey’s Defense minister last week resisted American pressure to withdraw and rejected the idea of timetables, declaring that the troops would not withdraw from Iraq until their mission is complete (sounds vaguely familiar…).

The international media is following the story almost as intently as if it involved a president and a blowjob. But for some reason, the American media finds that a photo of Barrack Obama in African garb is more newsworthy.

Putting Iraq back in the American consciousness would harm McCain and the GOP even further, as it would point out once again that every decision (including the surge) has been disastrous:

“How great can the situation in Iraq be when our NATO ally has invaded the country we militarily occupy in order to kill guerrillas harbored by our Iraqi Kurdish allies, who have been slipping across the border for which we are responsible in order to kill dozens of NATO troops in eastern Anatolia?”

In the words of a Middle East expert

Each day in Iraq costs the yearly salary of 11,000 border patrol agents!

Filed under: Iraq, Troop Surge @ 2:30 am

From the New York Times:

Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, cited the Joint Economic committee’s own calculations from last fall that showed that the money spent on the war each day is enough to enroll an additional 58,000 children in Head Start for a year, or make a year of college affordable for 160,000 low-income students through Pell Grants, or pay the annual salaries of nearly 11,000 additional border patrol agents or 14,000 more police officers.

This is costing you $3,845 PER SECOND!

February 20, 2008

Wisdom of ‘The Boy King:’ On Iraq and the state of the economy

Filed under: Iraq, Bush, Economy @ 12:35 am

What is he TALKING ABOUT???

bush-too-many-houses.jpg

During George’s trip to Africa he was interviewed by Ann Curry of the Today show, and denied that Iraq had anything to do with the the state of our economy:

Bush: …and I’m convinced fifty years from now people will look back and say, Thank God there were those that were willing to sacrifice.

Curry: But you’re saying you’re going to have to carry that burden. Some Americans believe that they feel they’re carrying the burden because of this economy.

Bush: Yeah, well…

Curry: They say we’re suffering because of this.

Bush: I don’t agree with that.

Curry: You don’t agree with that? It has nothing do with the economy, the war, the spending on the war?

Bush: I don’t think so. I think actually the spending in the war might help with jobs.

Curry: Oh, yeah?

Bush: Yeah, because we’re buying equipment, and people are working. I think this economy is down because we built too many houses…

Curry: hmmm…

Bush: …and the economy is adjusting. On the other hand we’re just about to kick out 157 billion dollars to our taxpayers……what would have been had we abandoned Iraq when times were tough and let those soldiers die in vain..

January 23, 2008

More Collateral damage from the Iraq war

Filed under: Middle East, Iraq, Oil, Economy @ 3:58 pm

madmax.jpg

A global recession is imminent

Never fear…Our Commander in chief tells us the economy is strong.

But some actually had it right all along. Some commentary from before we went to war, predicting that a prolonged war in the middle east would lead to a global recession:

Robert Shapiro, former undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration, 10/2/02:
“If the conflict wears on or, worse, spreads, the economic consequences become very serious. Late last year, George Perry at the Brookings Institution ran some simulations and found that after taking into account a reasonable use of oil reserves, a cut in world oil production of just 6.5 percent a year would send the United States and the world into recession.”

Independent, 11/16/02
“A war against Iraq could cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars, play havoc with an already depressed domestic economy and tip the world into recession because of the adverse effect on oil prices, inflation and interest rates, an academic study [by William Nordhaus, Sterling professor of economics at Yale University] has warned.”

CBS MarketWatch, 3/20/03
“If war with Iraq drags on longer than the few weeks or months most are predicting, corporate revenues will be flat for the coming year and will put the U.S. economy at risk of recession, according to a poll of chief financial officers.

September 12, 2007

Straight talk about Petraeus

Filed under: Middle East, Iraq, Troop Surge @ 12:17 am

From Newsweek:

John Arquilla, an intelligence and counterinsurgency expert at the Naval Postgraduate School, is even harsher in his assessment of Petraeus:

“I think Colin Powell used dodgy information to get us into the war, and Petraeus is using dodgy information to keep us there,” he said. “His political talking points are all very clear: the continued references he made to the danger of Al Qaeda in Iraq, for example, even though it represents only somewhere between 2 and 5 percent of the total insurgency. The continued references to Iran, when in fact the Iranians have had a lot to do with stability in the Shiite portion of the country.

And it’s not at all clear why things are a little better now. Is it because there are more troops, or is it because we’re negotiating with the insurgents and have moved to small operating outposts? On any given day we don’t have more than 20,000 troops operating. The glacial pace of reductions beggars the imagination.”

September 11, 2007

Surge Report out - America officially told to fuck off

Filed under: Iran, Middle East, Iraq, Bush, Protest, Troop Surge, 9-11 @ 1:39 am

What more is there to say about the Petraeus and Crocker show today, predictably unveiling nothing but more fucking of America.

Fucking of the troops - those killed for George’s messianic visions, or worse, maimed for life. Fucking of their families - the sons and daughters of who live with this disaster every second and have to buy into it because…Christ…How can you admit that this hellish life is all a mistake?

Fucking of our standing in the world - Yes, as a superpower but an often benevolent one. Fucking of the good will and sympathy we had after 9-11. Fucking of world opinion of the U.S.

Fucking of previous military leaders who didn’t back the party line. Fucking of the Iraq Study Group, Fucking of the GAO report on the surge…Fucking of our own intelligence agencies, who say we’re breeding terrorists over there faster than we can kill them.

Fucking of the real numbers - Sectarian violence, Children dying, poor levels of electricity and water, increases in disease, families displaced.

Fucking of the Iraqi people yet again, who in the latest BBC poll say life is worse for them and that the surge isn’t working.

Fucking of the future of America - not just of our strength in the world but our future health care, education, your children’s Social Security, our roads and bridges.

It goes on…and who is to blame? The Neocons, for sure. The party in power…the media…Our loser reps in Congress. All the bit players on the inside who see the wrongs everyday and bite their tongues either in fear or in denial.

And the American people as one. Including you and I.

The next step will be the ultimate wag the dog. A bad sequel that, someday, we will realize already played out 5 years ago. A new marketing prgram that somehow sounds familiar. After all, why change something that worked so well (and continues to)?

Those paying attention lately will not be surprised to find out the latest product will be another attack - this time on Iran. Sure, we could never send in ground troops, but we can bomb he hell out of them.

You don’t think the American people will go for it? It won’t happen again? I hope you’re right, but standby to be barraged with propaganda designed to convince say, 1/3 of the people that Iran is an imminent threat that needs to be handled. What about the other 66 percent?

Fuck the rest! That’s their feeling - these guys DO NOT CARE.

They have nothing to lose. They are going out with their biggest bang yet.

9-11. Iraq. Iran.

Cheney will be pushing it, but through his lapdog’s 9-11 memorial speech.

Start paying attention. Listen to the war drums. Be aware. Warn your friends.

Maybe as a nation we can head this one off…It will either take impeachment…or a lot of people in high places who truly are fed up…or a lot of marching in the streets.

September 7, 2007

Surge report coming soon!

Filed under: Iran, Middle East, Iraq, Bush, Troop Surge @ 12:40 am

cowboy.jpg

General Petraeus’ 6-month surge report is coming soon, and I feel about as much excitement as I would watching a bad western, knowing it will be a happy ending and our hero will ride off into the sunset.

The media will be all ‘a-twitter’ for a few days, but we all know what it will say, or at least what the spin will be. Sometimes I wonder why they even bother. I guess they have to pretend…

As a nation, we’ve now forgotten the last giantly hyped ‘benchmark’ report, the Iraq Study Group report, though it was less than a year ago. This was the one we all anxiously awaited, then watched as the Bush team downplayed it and somehow decided to take a 180 degree turn and increase our troop levels.

Last week an incredibly bleak report on the Iraq political situation came and went, making news for a day or two, but likely to be forgotten. The GAO report on the Iraq surge (which could not have been more critical of the claimed progress in Iraq) was released (leaked?) a week earlier than expected, so as to make news before the White House had a chance to whitewash it (though they are still doing so).

Recently, Our fearless leader has begun a campaign of comparing this war to previous wars, somehow attempting to twist the dire struggle in Iraq to previous world struggles against fascism, or aggression, or…who knows?

Now, the man who knew nothing of Sunnis and Shiites is lecturing the country in new versions of war history which, once again, would be highly amusing if the stakes were not so depressing. As one military analyst said:

“This was history written by speechwriters without regard to history”

Now, for the first time, the Boy Commander even compares Iraq to Vietnam, after claiming for several years that the comparison is unfair. In this case his spin was so outrageous that the Washington Post reported:

“Bush’s most controversial assertion — that U.S. troops could have prevailed in Vietnam had they stayed longer — is a neoconservative fantasy that almost all historians ridicule. But the overall campaign may still work”

Where will it end?

Perhaps the more realistic (not cynical…you can’t be too cynical about these guys) will foresee the selling of some bullshit benchmark progress on the media and the people. Perhaps they will expect the WDNBOC (Wimpy-Bend over-Do Nothing-Congress) to debate it in a flurry of hot air for a few days…then once again, in fear of looking weak (or somehow not supporting the troops), hand over another $50,000,000,000 (at the least) to continue Bush’s masturbatory ’spreading of democracy.’

I think it will end, as all stories do, with an unexpected twist. One that, in hindsight, was really not so unexpected.

To be continued tomorrow. Stay tuned…

UPDATE: TO BE CONTINUED ON 9/10/07
(IN ORDER TO BRING THE CONTINUATION OF STORY ON THE EVE OF THE RELEASE OF THE ADMINISTRATIONS ‘NEW PRODUCT.’)

August 13, 2007

Cheney 1994: Iraq would be a quagmire

Filed under: Middle East, Iraq, Cheney, Hypocrisy @ 9:03 pm

“How many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth?”

dick_cheney.jpg

This week video surfaced from 1994 of Dick Cheney being asked about the decision to NOT continue on into Baghdad at the end of Gulf War I.

As I understand it, he was speaking to the “Association of Wingnuts Who Feel We Should Invade The Rest of The World,” or American Enterprise Institute for short:

Q: Do you think the U.S., or U.N. forces, should have moved into Baghdad?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Because if we’d gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn’t have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq.

Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it — eastern Iraq — the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you’ve got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq.

The other thing was casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had. But for the 146 Americans killed in action, and for their families — it wasn’t a cheap war. And the question for the president, in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad, took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein, was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth?

Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.

August 6, 2007

U.S. Considering pumping Iraqi Oil directly to Israel

Filed under: Middle East, Iraq, Oil, Israel @ 1:38 am

feat6_oil.jpg

This is not a joke!

Yet another brilliant idea to help bring stability to the Middle East:

“The United States has asked Israel to check the possibility of pumping oil from Iraq to the oil refineries in Haifa. The request came in a telegram last week from a senior Pentagon official to a top Foreign Ministry official in Jerusalem.

The (Israeli) Prime Minister’s Office, which views the pipeline to Haifa as a “bonus” the U.S. could give to Israel in return for its unequivocal support for the American-led campaign in Iraq, had asked the Americans for the official telegram.

The new pipeline would take oil from the Kirkuk area, where some 40 percent of Iraqi oil is produced, and transport it via Mosul, and then across Jordan to Israel.”

Next Page »