peaceblogs


advertising

Newsvine poll

Demand Ron Paul

Bloglines

Firefox


  • Get Firefox!

google


  • Google


  • Search WWW
    Search UnFairWitness

BlogAds

blogads advertising

Abu Ghraib Torture Photos

  • Ag15
    The photos America doesn't want seen MORE photographs have been leaked of Iraqi citizens tortured by US soldiers at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison on the outskirts of Baghdad. Tonight the SBS Dateline program plans to broadcast about 60 previously unpublished photographs that the US Government has been fighting to keep secret in a court case with the American Civil Liberties Union. Although a US judge last year granted the union access to the photographs following a freedom-of-information request, the US Administration has appealed against the decision on the grounds their release would fuel anti-American sentiment. Some of the photos are similar to those published in 2004, others are different. They include photographs of six corpses, although the circumstances of their deaths are not clear. There are also pictures of what appear to be burns and wounds from shotgun pellets. The executive producer of Dateline, Mike Carey, said he was showing the pictures leaked to his program because it was important people understood what had happened at Abu Ghraib. Seven US guards were jailed following publication of the first batch of Abu Ghraib photographs in April 2004. Mr Carey said he could not explain why the photographs had not yet been published, as he thought it was likely that some journalists had them. "It think it's strange, maybe they think its more of the same."
Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 03/2004

« Al-Zarqawi makes The A-List of Terror | Main | Chris Albritton on the kidnapping of John Martinkus »

Saturday, October 16, 2004

More on suicide missions in Iraq

Rahul Mahajan puts his finger on the central issue of the Iraq occupation which makes the mutiny over the "suicide mission" an important story.

Apparently, an Army Reserve platoon, part of the 343rd Quartermaster Company from Rock Hill, South Carolina, is under arrest for refusing to obey orders to go on what they considered a suicide mission.

Stationed at Tallil Air Base south of Nasiriyah, they were ordered to do a fuel resupply run up to Taji, north of Baghdad. Fuel convoys in the "Sunni Triangle" nearly always come under fire; one soldier reportedly claimed that the chance of being attacked was "99 percent."

The platoon considered their trucks to be extremely unsafe; some were not able to go more than 40 mph, and would be sitting ducks. They ordinarily get an escort of armed Humvees and helicopters, but an escort was not available for the mission.

This actually points to the difficulty the United States would face if it tried to put in significantly larger numbers of troops, as John Kerry seems to want (he doesn't say he'll send more troops to Iraq; he says more troops are needed to do the job, that he intends to do the job, and that he'll increase the combat forces by 40,000 -- you do the math). It's already difficult to find enough escorts for resupply operations; that difficulty will be compounded the more combat troops are put in (because the need for fuel will increase along with the number of troops in the field).

You could increase the number of logistical and supply troops proportionately, maybe, but then you have more and more people to be easily killed by the resistance.

To put what happened in some perspective, consider that one very successful strategy of the resistance has been to target the American logistic structure, which relied heavily on Jordanian and Turkish truckers for resupply. Those who have kept up with the news out of Iraq know that the victims of the Iraqi guerillas have overwhelmingly been collaborators, with an emphasis on truckers. Kidnapped Jordanians and Turks don't make for big news stories in the American press, but these are the people who were trucking in supplies to the US military, and their ranks have been decimated by the guerillas. With the near elimination of any trucking firms either willing or able to resupply the US, the job has only recently fallen to the US military to drive their own convoys.

As Rajul points out above, more troops means more supplies that must be trucked in to Iraq. Even without an increase in troops, more of the US military is on the road in Iraq. The fact that the US now has few to no outside contractors driving the convoys means further overstretch and exposure to attack as soldiers take up the positions abandoned by contractors. Now, instead of military escorts of convoys driven by contractors, the military must drive and escort its own convoys, as well as use its own vehicles. It seems reasonable to assume that this is provoking a crisis in US military operations, partially evidenced by the request for British troops. This is precisely the goal of the Iraqi guerillas, as I pointed out here and as Zarqawi has allegedly announced today.

Today, 5 more US soldiers were killed in car bomb attacks. Yesterday's attacks killed 6 in two separate bombings. Are the US troops more exposed due to the lack of contractors willing to brave insurgent attacks to resupply the US military? Undoubtedly, they are. Look for more troops, increasingly demoralized by their realization that their presence in Iraq is pointless, to refuse more suicide missions.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/20617/1254811

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on suicide missions in Iraq:

Comments

The tasks these truck drivers are performing [resupplying and replenishment for troops] are normally performed by the military. In this case, the US Army Quartermaster Corps should be performing these in-theater tasks. However, consistent with American "free-market ideology", these tasks have been handed to American corporations [for big profits] which outsource it to sub-contractors. It is certainly a common and accepted military tactic to disrupt supply-lines. Likewise, many security tasks that are now being performed in Iraq are clearly military and these "security forces" are little more than mercenaries. One can hardly outsource the tasks of a soldier to mercenaries and then fault the enemy for killing "civilians".

Above post was in reference to: "the job has only recently fallen to the US military to drive their own convoys."

It shouldn't come as any surprise that the US adventure in Iraq is beginning to come apart at the seams. It isn't the technology nor is it the bravery that is lacking. The "suits" in the Pentagon have merely ignored the lessons of history which show that supply lines are the weakest link in the chain of any invasion, siege or occupation. Napoleon learned, Hitler learned. But will we learn, or are we going to continue to order our soldiers out on suicide missions? It is past time to put both the beginning and the end of the supply line firmly inside of our own borders.

First of all, you need to realize how many troops are currently in Iraq. At last count over 120,000. How many missions are conducted daily? Thousands. How many soldiers in this quartermaster unit decided to disobey orders, 18? This does not represent a trend, or sound an alarm for things to come. From my experience of having been 'boots on the ground' in Iraq for almost seventeen months now, this was an isolated incident. Hopefully, if proven true, will be punished swiftly and with the full reach of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. As for the above comment that soldiers in Iraq realize that this misison is pointless, I would like to ask for the source of this information. The overwhelming majority of combat soldiers where I am (just north of Bagdhad) know that we are needed in Iraq. Whether or not it was the right decision to come here in the first place isn't mine to make. Bottom line, we are here now, and if we leave before the job is complete not only are we going to dishonor those who have already given their lives, but we will be causing the deaths of thousands more Iraqi citizens. I don't claim to speak for a majority of soldiers in Iraq, I can only speak for those who are here with me, who spend every day working in a city that that CNN and Time magazine say is a 'no go' zone for American Troops. If I had to watch and believe everything that the mainstream media is feeding you about Iraq, I too might feel negative towards the war. I urge all of you to actually talk to soldiers who are and who have been in Iraq and get their perspective, don't just regurgitate that which you see on the news, or which you read in someone else's email. Thank you for taking the time to read my brief thoughts.

SSG in Baqubah.

Sgt, I believe the point being made is that private contractors had previously been running these fuel convoys, and now they have left Iraq and military personnel have taken over. The convoys have traditionally had both air and ground support while in transit. Unfortunately, the air and ground support were needed elsewhere this time because our forces are apparently stretched too thin already, and this incident illustrated that so very clearly. Without air and ground support, the mission's chance of success was very low -- according to the men who have actually been running these convoys and are aware of the conditions on the ground. No one is praising these 19, but rather criticizing their commanding officer and the entire rationale behind the incident.

This has merely proved the point that we either have to greatly increase troop strength in Iraq -- many in the military say to around 500,000 -- in order to secure the country and make it safe, or in the alternative, bring the 120,000 back home rather than leave them as sitting ducks. Obviously, I prefer the latter. But one thing is glaring apparent, it cannot continue on this way indefinitely. Major combat was over a year and half ago, and this "minor" combat is taking the blood of too many of our brave young men and women.

Good luck to you, Sgt. I mean that sincerely.

Ooops, I am calling you Sgt. I am only on my first cup of coffee and my eyes are not quite open this Sunday morning.

RE: "I urge all of you to actually talk to soldiers who are and who have been in Iraq and get their perspective"

The only problen with that doltish idea is that soldiers are currently muzzled [and you know that] and we are only getting the authorized version puked out by hundreds of PsyOps guys posting on the internet.

---------------------------------
Muzzling Soldiers Is Nothing New
- By David H. Hackworth,

Sgt. Al Lorentz wrote a piece from Iraq (See "A Sergeant Speaks the Hard Truth," Special Reports, Sept. 30, 2004, SFTT.org). He now faces disciplinary action for "disloyalty" and "insubordination." He could end up with 20 years in the slammer if found guilty. An officer in Iraq who has asked to remain anonymous says: "The establishment here wants to present the picture that everything is A-OK when it’s too often not the case. Soldiers shouldn’t be punished or made to feel like they’re disloyal, not part of the team, troublemakers, whiners, dissenters, malcontents, etc., etc., just because they give somebody a true sitrep on certain things going on over here. But sadly this is the case." Then there’s the personal attack on anyone with a point of view that’s different from the party line: You’re un-American; or you’re supporting the enemy or not supporting the troops. The latest tactic is to say you’re sending out mixed messages that hurt troop morale.

Read complete articled at: http://www.sftt.org/

The latest tidbit of information on this story is that the jet fuel this convoy was to deliver was polluted beyond use and had already been refused by the base it was intended for. The captain ordered the troops to try and dump it off on another base way beyond their normal operational territory and without cover during the 200 mile drive - with full expectation that this base would reject it and send them back fully loaded, too.

If anybody should be subject to arrest and court-martial, it should be the captain who gave the order that would willingly sacrifice lives and equipment in order to save his own face.

'I urge all of you to actually talk to soldiers who are and who have been in Iraq and get their perspective, don't just regurgitate that which you see on the news, or which you read in someone else's email.'

I urge all of you never to believe anyone on the Internet calling himself a soldier serving in Iraq unless you are absolutely sure of the source. I also urge all supposed soldiers to learn what a comma splice is and how to avoid it, particularly if they are supposed officers.

The beheading picture is a powerful one.
I am very sorry for his sufferance and for his love ones. This Zarqawi is a monster, is he not?

I was wondering if you would like to add to your links the 100 + pictures of mass graves in Iraq.

Iraq's mass graves

Diane:

This is a thread on the mutiny of US soldiers in Iraq. I have no idea to which picture you refer. As for your link, I would prefer to have more information rather than just pictures, i.e. when, where, who, how many, etc. A map with all 100 locations would be nice, as well as the story on what happened and when at each location. Let me know if you find anything like that.

Hello Tex,
I realize this is not the subject of your last posting. I was just commenting on the pictures offered in this blog.
I will be happy to give you as much info as I can find, give me a few hours.
Those pictures of the mass graves are from Iraq, near Hila. There is an estimated 300 000 corpses, killed in various horrible ways, men, women children. Some were freshly murdered judging by the state of the decomposition of the bodies. Those were discovered after the fall of the Hussein regime.
The abuses there were sickening, beyond belief. very eyes. The methods of torture and killing were as imaginative as can be. Mr. Johnson severed head placed on his back by Zarqawi reminded me a bit of that. We got to see all those sad things to understand them fully.
If you wish for me to give you more information elsewhere (not in the comment section), just let me know. You are very welcome to use my email.
Best regards.
(My apologies, my English writing is not the best; a second language curse!)

correction; part of the text was cut...

* ...Shameful that this happened in our times, under our very eyes.

SSG in IRAQ

I aplaud you for your courrage to speak up and allow people to know that the line they are being fed is not necessarly the entire truth, but only a small part! Some of actually appreciate the job you all are doing.(Please excuse any misspelled words, my spell check won't work here.)
Hope that you stay safe, and return home soon.

Diane:

There are three hundred thousand mass graves around Hilla?

Where did you get that information? Why does the website have the title "Iraq's Mass Graves" with no text whatsoever, no names, no places identified? There are 60 pages of photos on that site and none of them are identified. Who took them? Who runs that site?

300 000 people dead only, so far estimated.

PM admits graves claim 'untrue'

Peter Beaumont, foreign affairs editor
Sunday July 18, 2004

The Observer
Downing Street has admitted to The Observer that repeated claims by Tony Blair that '400,000 bodies had been found in Iraqi mass graves' is untrue, and only about 5,000 corpses have so far been uncovered.

The claims by Blair in November and December of last year, were given widespread credence, quoted by MPs and widely published, including in the introduction to a US government pamphlet on Iraq's mass graves.

In that publication - Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves produced by USAID, the US government aid distribution agency, Blair is quoted from 20 November last year: 'We've already discovered, just so far, the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves.'

On 14 December Blair repeated the claim in a statement issued by Downing Street in response to the arrest of Saddam Hussein and posted on the Labour party website that: 'The remains of 400,000 human beings [have] already [been] found in mass graves.'

The admission that the figure has been hugely inflated follows a week in which Blair accepted responsibility for charges in the Butler report over the way in which Downing Street pushed intelligence reports 'to the outer limits' in the case for the threat posed by Iraq.

Downing Street's admission comes amid growing questions over precisely how many perished under Saddam's three decades of terror, and the location of the bodies of the dead.

The Baathist regime was responsible for massive human rights abuses and murder on a large scale - not least in well-documented campaigns including the gassing of Halabja, the al-Anfal campaign against Kurdish villages and the brutal repression of the Shia uprising - but serious questions are now emerging about the scale of Saddam Hussein's murders.

It comes amid inflation from an estimate by Human Rights Watch in May 2003 of 290,000 'missing' to the latest claims by the Iraqi Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, that one million are missing.

At the heart of the questions are the numbers so far identified in Iraq's graves. Of 270 suspected grave sites identified in the last year, 55 have now been examined, revealing, according to the best estimates that The Observer has been able to obtain, around 5,000 bodies. Forensic examination of grave sites has been hampered by lack of security in Iraq, amid widespread complaints by human rights organisations that until recently the graves have not been secured and protected.

While some sites have contained hundreds of bodies - including a series around the town of Hilla and another near the Saudi border - others have contained no more than a dozen.

And while few have any doubts that Saddam's regime was responsible for serious crimes against humanity, the exact scale of those crimes has become increasingly politicised in both Washington and London as it has become clearer that the case against Iraq for retention of weapons of mass destruction has faded.

The USAID website, which quotes Blair's 400,000 assertion, states: 'If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot's Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.'

It is an issue that Human Rights Watch was acutely aware of when it compiled its own pre-invasion research - admitting that it had to reduce estimates for the al-Anfal campaign produced by Kurds by over a third, as they believed the numbers they had been given were inflated.

Hania Mufti, one of the researchers that produced that estimate, said: 'Our estimates were based on estimates. The eventual figure was based in part on circumstantial information gathered over the years.'

A further difficulty, according to Inforce, a group of British forensic experts in mass grave sites based at Bournemouth University who visited Iraq last year, was in the constant over-estimation of site sizes by Iraqis they met. 'Witnesses were often likely to have unrealistic ideas of the numbers of people in grave areas that they knew about,' said Jonathan Forrest.

'Local people would tell us of 10,000s of people buried at single grave sites and when we would get there they would be in multiple hundreds.'

A Downing Street spokesman said: 'While experts may disagree on the exact figures, human rights groups, governments and politicians across the world have no doubt that Saddam killed hundreds of thousands of his own people and their remains are buried in sites throughout Iraq.'
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4973393-102279,00.html

Dianne,

How many of these mass graves are from post 1992?

Hypersceptic and Tex,
Do it really matter if you were killed before or after 1992?
It would take more than ten minutes to answer the questions you are asking if you read the abundant information available here and elsewhere. You could actually read these links.
For the numbers, clearly nobody knows how many exactly.
We do know for example, that in the Iran/Iraq war, 700 000 plus Iraqis were sacrificed on the battle field for nothing. We know there are many, many mass graves not yet fully explored.
But at the end of the day, are we going to say that Saddam was a good guy if we only have find 50 000?
Any single and cruel death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic.
One of my Iraqi friends lost 15 members in his family. Bless him and the others who are still heartbroken.

One of my Iraqi friends lost 15 members in his family. Bless him and the others who are still heartbroken.

That's terrible. Was it during Shock and Awe or the invasion or the bombing of Fallujah or Najaf? Or just random violence?

Diane -- Does it really matter? Yes, to me the truth matters.

Dianne,

Of course it matters. If it happened almost entirely before 1993, and if although Iraq was a nasty place, if there was no mass killing in the decade before the US invasion, what good did the invasion do? If the mass killing was a by-product of US interference in the region gone askew, then invading seems all the more stupid, doesn't it.

Of course truth and accuracy really matter on this one.

Life matters more than what we perceive as the truth...
but talking about the truth.

My Iraqi friend, his family members were all killed under Saddam.
Him and his family are marked for ever.
The father had to pay for the bullets that killed his sons, just that. he was also ruined financially...
Another Iraqi friend just lost 5 members of his family, again under father Saddam.

e are so fortunate to live where we live, so free to talk and disagree with civility or not sometimes without risking our lives or our families.
I know more personal horror stories from ME people than I'd like to.
Bless you all guys.

Death and destruction has always been the case in the Middle East. Don't be surprised if it continues into the future. You can't truly help people that don't condemn Terrorists. I am not surprised, neither should you be.

Diane
life matters - or death, for your propoganda.

This whole website is propaganda. Don't act so surprised.

I am afraid you are right, indifferent_qed.
There is no point for even trying.
Who cares here if my Iraqi pal lost 15 members of his family under Saddam as too many other Iraqis.

I appreciate very much Tex's courtesy however.
Wish him and his love ones only the best.


Dianne, if a friend of mine lost 15 family members in Ukraine or Siberia under Stalin in the 1930s, would that justify Hitler's invasion of the USSR? Think about it. Two wrongs do not make a right. For your argument that the US deposing Saddam is good to be valid, you must do more than just demonsrate that Saddam was a very wicked person; you must also demonstrate that the US invasion will bring about a demonstrable improvement. On what basis can you do this?

Some see only the fires of chemistry, some productive answers, and some only spread their personal chaos. But democracy is now a ship on a sea in a hurricane. If you tear it down or burn it, or run it through with holes, who will care for you when you drown?

Vote for the better liar, you are the rational college graduate, vote for the prosecuting attorney, join the chaos of accusers, forget about the natural illusion, embrace the chronic delusion, and live for the dharma of the imbalance of your own superiority.

I will take the simple man who is true and the way of freedom and the patience of time. And I will pray the ship survives your onslaught and makes it back to port.

No, indifferent-QED, this is not propoganda.
This and others are the Davids fighting Goliath made of (huge propoganda machinery of the media + ignorant majority of the public + a dangerous government).
I hope you are not too blind to see this, Golia...I mean indifferent-QED.

If your posting here makes you feel like you're making a difference then you're in for a surpise. People in the Middle East have been fighting and killing each other longer that you've been alive here on earth. It seems arrogant that you think you're going to stop war and strife in the Middle East within your lifetime.

Did you get the meaning of 'ignorant majority' correctly?
I don't think so!!
Try again.

War-hater, or just hater,
I got this for you and hypersceptic.
I beg you to remain respectful.
realtiy under Saddam by another real Iraqi

"I am Iraqi American. My family is Shia Muslim, and my parents were born in Nejef. I was born in Baghdad in 1969, and we moved to the US in 1975 when my father won a scholarship to study here. We moved back to Iraq in 1980 after my father got his degree. This was very bad timing.

In 1980, while visiting relatives in England (we were en route to Iraq) we learned that two of my cousins were executed for having opposed the idea of war with Iran. They were both medical students at the University of Baghdad and belonged to a group opposed to war. One of them disappeared – to this day we don’t know what happened to him.

In 1981 my mother’s cousin’s entire family was jailed because one of their sons fled the army, so they took the entire family, including a nine year-old son and two teenage daughters, to jail as substitute prisoners – they spent a total of four years in Abu Ghraib - the grandmother died there.

My father’s best friend was executed by the Mukhabarat in 1985 - he was a secular Sunni Muslim whose parents came from Sammarra. My father would have met the same fate if we had not escaped in 1982. We were so very lucky!

Saddam and his henchmen were very, very bad for Iraq. They ruled the country through fear and intimidation. Iraqis who did not agree with them were murdered or jailed. I was very saddened after reading Zeyad's last post (Healing Iraq) and of course the kidnapping of Margaret Hassan. It looks like Saddam's supporters (now aided by fundamentalists and non-Iraqi Arab extremists) continue to abduct and murder Iraqis who are even slightly friendly with Americans. These morons will do anything to hold on to power. May God bless those who support democracy and freedom in Iraq."
M. Excerpt from Hammorabi.

Hey, Diane -

What do you have to say to these people?

"Where is [Interim Prime Minister] Iyad Allawi? Where is George Bush?" demands Najjad. "Nobody cares about us. We accept Saddam is gone, that he did a lot of bad things. But these people must convince us to trust them. This is why Iraqis want Saddam back again."

Najjad describes the previous day's bombing to the rapt family, squeezed with their guests into a living room not two armspans wide. "We were so confused. We were so afraid, we grabbed our abayas [black shawls] and ran," says Najjad. "One woman tried to help her child and got a shell on her neck. Mothers were screaming when they couldn't find their children, when they couldn't even find their flesh."

"Now we all think that Saddam Hussein was better," chimes in Ali's aunt, Nidhal Ismat. Amal, 15 years old and considered the intellectual of the Methboub family, adds her thoughts. "It is true he was an oppressor, but at least there was security," she says. "Now if one of us goes out, we say goodbye like we will never see them again."

"It's the Americans' fault," says Aunt Nidhal. "They left the border open. When Americans made Saddam Hussein go, they should have paid attention. Right now, there is no solution to the looting, killing and kidnapping."

"We used to be strangled with spies and the [intelligence services]," says Amal, exasperated, "but now it is insecurity."

Last year, as part of a peace delegation, Amal visited South Korea - the first time any member of the family had left Iraq. She still feels the power of a visit there to a war cemetery.

"They said: 'This country [South Korea] wanted to be free, and this was the price. This we had to lose, to be free,' " Amal recalls. "I felt in my heart that it would be the same for Iraq, that we would have to pay."

"But where is the democracy?" asks Ali, the slightly built potential groom. "It's just killing. It's just body parts in the street. Saddam is still our leader, because the main reason they came was for weapons of mass destruction."

Terms of engagement: A match is made in Iraq

Tex,
I appreciate you staying respectful towards me, as we do not see things the same way. This means a lot about who you are. i respect you for that.
What I say to Najjad and Faizia, who I know is this.
Oppression is impossible to live (one gets sick psychologically) and yes; war is disgusting! I hate it too, so much sacrifices. Freedom cost a lot when one is oppressed. Tears are forever while oppressed even with some kind of security. (I think of kids stocked in a abusive family, they are secure too, but not safe, and then they end up in the street or repeat abuses in their own adult life)
War in order to fight an oppressor, to free one self, will caused tears and pain but then freedom is at the end of the tunnel. Then we make sure to not ever go back there. It is a long process.
Trust your self and your people to built the kind of society and the future for the following generations you all deserve as humans. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not just a facade for the UN, it is for everyone to enjoy, not only for us over here.
Anything is better than to ended up in a tree shredder: feet first, one of Huday's favorite.
That is what I would say.
That would not help to appaise their anger and frustration. Nor would Saddam could comfort them...
I use to hate war Tex, deeply. I was war-hater. I saw too much pain and misery. Africa is also a mess, we are not done there... We are all in this together.
Years ago, I would have been with you guys, here, in your blog.
Now, I work for human rights, full time.
Thanks my friend.
Again, I appreciate you welcoming me over here so far.

Dear ma'am,
Two wrongs don't make a right!!!!

Post a comment

My Photo

I also post at


Ron Paul on Technorati

LewRockwell Blog

  • Add to Google

newsvine ron paul

Recent Posts

Blog Roll I

Blog stuff

Blogads1