Thursday, March 30, 2006

Status Quo is good enough.

I was looking at some documentaries on the web last night and I came across this interesting piece about the CIA's operations. Here is what an Ex-CIA agent had to say:

"After the Oct crisis of 1962, Kennedy said that we would never physically invade the island(Cuba) if Khrushchev would remove the ballistic missiles. So therefore, the US was forced into a policy of trying to bring Castro down. Which meant disrupting the lifestyle of the Cuban citizen, doing whatever we could to sabotage the economy to discredit the revolution. One way of doing that of course was trying to control the amount of food coming into Havana, before distribution to the public and if we could do that by puncturing tires for a truck loaded with tomatoes for the market or if we could cause a truck of fresh food meat, or Milk, to be contaminated on the way into town. And I remember one particular instance where a brand new secondary school that has opened up in the country side was going to receive its week supply of fresh milk we bribed the driver of the truck, we knew where he stopped to have breakfast on his route we wanted him to take a few extra minutes so we could put cement powder in the milk. We declared war on school children, that shouldn't be the policy of US government.
We don't win friends and influence people that way declaring war on children and innocent civilians , a big mistake
but the US government orders it and participates in it and CIA's goal eventually was to increase frustration to the point where there will be a civil revolution within Cuba to bring him down

What is interesting to note is how such operations can easily be seen happening in a place like Iraq today. Things like lack of security and electricity.

Of course this won't be new to anyone. I strongly believe that the US doesn't want to have a secure Iraq. Whether is it participating in the bombings or not is not news to most people. What most people don't agree on however, is that since the US Government administration says that they want a stable democratically elected government; that means that they really do mean it. They say that the reason Iraq is not stable is because of the insurgency.

I believe that if the US government wants security and stability things will be in a much better shape if not totally secure. This is an indicator that the US would rather maintain the status quo in Iraq.

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Bush casts his Iraqi Ballot

"George Bush sent a message via Khalilzad to Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, as head of the Alliance, telling him that George Bush doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept Ibrahim Jaafari as prime minister," he said.

Of course this comes as no surprise to me. However, there are some people that actually believe that the US wants to promote democracy in the Middle East.

Actions speak louder than words. People should learn to listen to actions and effects. Rather than what a spokesman of a certain entity would decalre.

The US military action or lack of it in Iraq speaks louder than their claisms to want to help the Iraqi people.

Thursday, March 16, 2006

Iraqi PM 'prepared to step down'

Iraqi PM 'prepared to step down'

Even though I have no reason to disrespect Al-Jaafari , but I have to wonder how many lives will it take for someone to give up his seat? The longer it takes to form a government the more time those bickering over seats give for the seeds of civil war to be planted. Mind you I have little faith even in a formed government that it has any power or influence. The fate of Iraq is in the hands of its people.

Maybe Saddam was more popular than we thought he was. It is either that or Iraqis hate foreign occupation so much that they can would form a coalition with the Devil to fight the occupation. Either way, The unrest in Iraq is not done through "insurgency" or a minority of foreign Arabs from Syria, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. These are extremely well organized efforts penetrating every level of Government and society. With that said the same questions asked 3 years ago are still valid:

- Why aren't the borders secured yet?
- How long does it take the United States Army to secure a country?
- How long does it take for the United States to learn from its so called "mistakes" ?
- Is the United States Government in dire need of Project Managers? Does the US need PMI courses? Surely, they had a goal, project schedule , dealines to meet?
- What will it take for Iraqis to think in isolation of their emotions ?
- Is it not clear for us to see that the US doesn't want to secure the country?
- Is it not obvious that the US might have an agenda beyond that which it advertises?
- Is it not obvious that the future of Iraq lies in the hands of Iraqis?
- Is it not obvious that supporting a local tribe leader, religious leader, or ethnic represntative only paves the way for a divide and eventually a Civil war?
- Is it not obvious that no one benefits from market bombings and kidnappers?
- Aren't the obstacles in Iraq's way to security well defined?
- Isn't the bickering between Government officials childish?
- Do you really want someone who is more concerned about his seat to take care of your affairs?
- Who benefits from Civil war and violence between Iraqis? The answer is clearly not Iraqis, then the next question is vital
- Why are Iraqis so stupid to allow themselves to be manipulated by anyone and everyone?

Iraqi is on the brink of Civil war. Regardless of what the optimists might say. Optimists are not in touch with reality. Iraq is already socially divided. The Media (from CNN to Al-Jazeera) has been brain washing us with phrases like "Sunni Triangle" since day one. No one was able to see those signs. Not even now. Its a conspiracy and everyone from Bush to Al-Jazeera, to the Ghost of Zarqawi are conspiring against you and me.

Only YOU can change that.

The starting point is simple:

A- Identify all the obstacles(foreign intervention, baseless killing of Iraqis and other civilians, sectarian, ethnic, and separatist politics) without daemonizing any groups.
B- Start with yourself. Change your attitude. Most likely you are someone in need of it.
C- Speak out every time you see something wrong.
D- Keep asking for positive change.

Finally most likely, my words will not echo very far. We will find that a year from Iraq will look like a country swept by Mongol invaders a hundred times in both directions.

Friday, March 03, 2006

How long does a Super Power need to restore Security?

Well I can do what CNN does and bring a panel of experts and ask them questions. However, since I don't have the funding nor the resources I will just use common sense. To be able to answer that question let us look at similar situations across the globe. Going back in time ... We are lucky enough to find many similar situations which we can draw parallels from.

We have Afghanistan and Somalia amongst several others. So how long did it take the US to bring security back to those countries? Well the answer is infinity. That's right, both of those countries are still unsecure. Which makes you wonder, is it possible that the US Super Power is unable to secure a small nation(relatively) like Iraq?

Maybe it just doesn't want to. I have written an e-mail prior to the start of Occupation Iraq in 2003. I had predicted the outcome of the US intervention and what could come out of it. At a time where most Iraqis were optimistic. I think it is worth noting that Iraqis were thinking with their emotions rather than using their logic. Most of them wanted Saddam so bad that they decided to cling to the straw that is the US promise.

[ based on the saying: A drowning person would try to keep afloat even by clinging to a straw ]
or am I mixing up proverbs? If I am , I don't think that George Bush is better than I, and I quote:
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas... [doubt] probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on ... [pause and doubt]... shame on you. Fool me [doubt and confusion].. {Mumbles}When you're fooled, you can't get fooled again."

In my forecast I said that Iraqis shouldn't expect life after Saddam to get any better. I wasn't able to forecast lawlessness. I did think that Civil War would breakout. I imagined that many people would die as a result. I did think that people would suffer long term health hazards due tenvironmentalapollutionon caused by Military intervention and Weapons (Depleated Uranium .. etc). It was easy to make predictions as all I had to do is look at the US other example (Afghanistan). I was right ... Iraq has become another Afghanistan ...

The United States Government and Military Officers are not stupid or short sighted. A common minconception oftereferreded to by some news sources. Stating that the US had made miscalculation in Iraq or that they have made mistakes. They haven't, they are having things the way they want them.

Lawlessness serves the US Military machine. After all most targets are Iraqi Civilians and not US camps. All pro-war factions that control the US Government (US Military, Oil Tycoons, Big Corporations, and Zionists) albenefitet from a war torn Iraq.

In fact if the US really intends to restore security and have made a mistake, you would think that by now they would figure out what a commoner like me figured out. Securing the boarders and then Collecting arms and weaponry. No attempts have been made to conduct such efforts. In three years, even you can bring lawfulness to the Animal Kingdom.

Of course many people would argue this point ... Sure lets argue. Lets say it is "not that easy" There is more to it. They have made mistakes ... etc. Better yet, lets say they can't. Well then the next best thing to do is GET OUT! At least that way Iraqis will take it out on each other. Which is bound to happen sooner or later. Only this way, it will be sooner and thus bringing the light at the end of the tunnel closer as well.

Finally, I hope that there aren't any more optimists out there thinking that things will get better based on the Status Quo. The only way things can get better is through change.

As for what that change might be? Welthat'sts a whole different post, maybe even many posts.

While the rest of the world population is sound asleep ...

According to the BBc

Gangs 'kill freely' in Iraq chaos

"Hundreds of bodies showing signs of torture or execution arrive at the Baghdad mortuary each month, a senior UN official has told the BBC."

While ....

"Kurdish and Sunni Arab leaders are unhappy with Mr Jaafari, and have said they will not join a national unity government with him at its head."

I feel guilty just by living a normal life knowing that many people in Iraq are not. I feel pangs of conscience everytime I receive a paycheck or purchase an airline ticket. Despite the fact that probably the most I could do is Blog. While our "Leaders" are bickering like children on a piece of pie.

I suggest that our leaders live outside the Green Zone, so that they can appreciate the seriousness of the situation there. Meanwhile they live in the Green Zone as though they are living in a foreign country. Maybe then they would make security a priority over bickering. Which brings us to the next question. Does the Iraq Government have the ability to stop the violence? If the answer is No, then that only makes me want to write the next post.