Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

If the US had a real claim against Iran.

by metavision Mon Feb 12th, 2007 at 08:38:08 PM EST

If there was a real claim, the proof wouldn´t be stretched, forced, bent out of shape, delayed, delegated and underserved this way.  It would be presented!

Sunday´s WaPo article contains contradictions, lacks reasonable questioning and is a fly-by piece of work, but for what I have read on the sidelines, the NYT coverage does not even pose a single question about what these GRUNTS SAID, in this cheap circus show.

(* marks the quoted paragraphs and after the dashes are ---my own words.)

WaPo:  http://tinyurl.com/22akqc

*Military Ties Iran To Arms In Iraq
--US military says......... it can tie Iran to arms in Iraq, but does not prove it.

(My stretched version)


*BAGHDAD, Feb. 11  Senior U.S. military officials in Iraq sought Sunday to link Iran to deadly armor-piercing explosives and other weapons

--Why not in DC, NY, at an international organization?  How senior?  Exactly by whose orders?  Who can delegate a war-provoking claim of world proportions?  Why doesn´t the senior war-monger show his face when making an international claim?  How do I know this is not mutiny by some dis-grunt-led block head?

*...the officials displayed mortar shells, rocket-propelled grenades and a powerful cylindrical bomb, capable of blasting through an armored Humvee, that they said were manufactured in Iran

--1.  This is a very good plan to evade responsibility for the lack of armor in military vehicles in Iraq and blame Iran for military casualties from now on.   2.  A cylindrical bomb.  Do they park their H´s wherever they see a cylindrical artifact?  Or do they sit on their H´s until an enemy fellow comes and places the cylindrical bomb under it?

*"Iran is a significant contributor to attacks on coalition forces, and also supports violence against the Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi people," said a senior defense official, who was joined by a defense analyst and an explosives expert, both also from the military.

--Define and quantify "significant", as compared with Israel, Russia, Spain?, India, China, Cuba? and the rest of the planet.   I will call that statement "quaint" to spare major words.

*The officials said they would speak only on the condition of anonymity, so the explosives expert and the analyst, who would normally not speak to the news media, could provide information directly. The analyst's exact title and full name were not revealed to reporters. The officials released a PowerPoint presentation including photographs of the weaponry, but did not allow media representatives to record, photograph or videotape the briefing or the materials on display.

--Isn´t that a generous act!  Did they wear hoods and gas masks?  No name, no rank, no serial number, no responsibility...  That´s an ethically- transparent way to run a government, err, war.  Considering they are known for media "psy-ops", where the USG pays for canned articles across the globe, they could have just dropped leaflets from a plane in major world cities.

--No more SOS at the UN and no more W, held up by a podium, at a military academy.  No siree!  We are not going to get them on a "technical" lie ever again. ´Chainy can scare people just with his face, but those two will delegate the lying to the grunts in the "green zone" from now on....´

* An official at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad called the U.S. accusations "fabricated" and "baseless."

--The anonymous official apparently doesn´t speak in complete sentences and the reporter run out of "follow-up".

*The U.S. officials said weapons were smuggled into the country by the Quds Force, an elite unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard

--Read a little further to find they CONTRADICTED THEMSELVES:  "...it's never going to happen," he said.  They didn´t even rehearse it properly!

*With so much official U.S. buildup about the purported evidence of Iranian influence in Iraq, the briefing was also notable for what was not said or shown. The officials offered no evidence to substantiate allegations that the "highest levels" of the Iranian government had sanctioned support for attacks against U.S. troops. Also, the military briefers were not joined by U.S. diplomats or representatives of the CIA or the office of the Director of National Intelligence.

--Thank you for noting the missing evidence, the missing authority and responsibility!

*Although the administration has made many assertions about Iran's nuclear program, its role in Iraq and its ties to groups on the State Department's terrorism list, the U.S. government has never publicly offered evidence proving the allegations. The briefing was the first time during the Bush administration that officials had sought to make a public intelligence case against Iran.

--The USG offers no evidence, but lets its officials make a case...  I wish this were humorous.

*Iraq's deputy foreign minister, Labeed M. Abbawi, said in an interview Sunday that the Iraqi government remains in the dark about the full U.S. investigation into Iranian activities in Iraq. "It is difficult for us here in the diplomatic circles just to accept whatever the American forces say is evidence," he said. "If they have anything really conclusive, then they should come out and say it openly, then we will pick it up from there and use diplomatic channels"

--One at last!  One character trying to make sense, summarizing the situation for the public, asking logical questions, calling things by their name.  

*U.S. military officials in Iraq had previously described the use of "explosively shaped charges" to target vehicles, but Sunday's briefing was the first time they displayed pieces of what they called an "explosively formed penetrator" or EFP.

--Another __ing acronym for a killing thing.  I can just see the words taking up a whole title page of the presentation and repeated every page thereafter for the slower reporters.  Military people seem to feel better about death if it´s caused by some acronym.  Now, I don´t know physics, but please tell me that "explosively" has not been defined and is not a known quantity.  Is it?  What does it look-like?  What does a "pene-traitor" look like???  (No, don´t draw me a picture; just describe it.)

*The one such device shown at the briefing was a cylinder of PVC pipe about eight inches long and about six inches in diameter.  The officials said the devices are deadly because the explosion sends a slug of malleable metal, often copper, at velocities high enough to penetrate the armor of tanks and Humvees. Their components require precision machining that Iraq has shown no evidence of being able to perform, the officials said.  

--Malleable means shapeable, bendable... right?  Which seems to contradict the purpose of something to ___trate metal and armor.  What do I know?

*The first known attack using such weapons in Iraq occurred in May 2004,....   They have also been used in southern Lebanon, the explosives expert said.

--They have kept quiet for almost 3 years to start name-dropping now?  Why now?
As if we didn´t know.  Which country used them in Lebanon?  Both?  All three or more?  And where did those monstrosities come from...?  Do tell us, before more people die!  We are going to find out anyway and we, people, will get even more unpleasant when we find out they are made by a US political contributor, under a foreign license...

*The defense analyst said Iranians used Iraqi smugglers to bring the weapons into Iraq. "The smoking gun of an Iranian standing over an American with a gun, it's never going to happen," he said.

--Funny you just said the opposite, dear analyst.  Is it the Iranians, or the Iraqis?
Why don´t you get your facts straight?  Why did you detain the Iranians then?

*A group of Iraqis coming into southern Iraq from Iran were detained by Iraqi border forces in 2005, the defense analyst said, and "they had the materials, EFPs and whatnot, on them."

--Pray tell, did you stop guarding the borders back then, that so many more acronyms have been brought in????  "...materials, EFP´s and whatnot..."  Now, that´s an articulate, professional,... analyst to quote from, on a case for war!

* The officials provided further details on the case of two Iranians captured during a December raid on the compound of a leading Shiite politician, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, and five Iranians seized in the raid of a liaison office in the northern city of Irbil in January.   .....  Hakim visited President Bush at the White House in December.

--The first two have been released and the other five are expected to be, so what are
the blooming details?  That they had nothing to arrest them for except being Iranian?
And why invite a "rogue element" to the Whouse the same month?

*...they were flushing documents down a toilet...

--A small office, in a small town, in a war zone, where the, rare, sanitation systems have been destroyed, not only has a toilet handy, but it is used exactly as seen in countless drug-raid films from the US, according to grunts from the US.  Amazing.

*U.S. forces found a bag of hair

This one must be for the Baghdad comedy club.  If I were a male, a Muslim male, from a USG detested nation, in a war-torn country, occupied by said USG, while committing a dangerous act of espionage ,..... I am sure I would shave my head to stick out like a sore thumb!, unlike the locals, but for sentiment´s sake, I would definitely save my shaven hair for posterity!  Brilliant.

*...showed specific signs of Iranian manufacture, the officials said.  ... while other countries make mortar shells that have removable parts, the explosives expert said.

--If I had reason to trust them on anything else, I may believe this uniquely true.

*Stephen J. Hadley, said in a recent meeting with reporters that the original media presentation had overstated the evidence against Iran and needed to be toned down.

--Oh, right.  A born-again idol of ethical and humane behavior...

*...the senior defense official said charts and graphs outlining the scope of attacks with shaped charges had been removed from the presentation by the intelligence community.  

--Another unrequested favor to the public, which I have to assume covers up political maneuvers and not security secrets.

*The U.S. forces in Iraq "are not trying to hype this up to be more than it is."

--It would be nice if they said exactly what it is, with proof, because it could be said, loud and clear, by the W itself, in a credible venue.

It´s not that I don´t trust ´em; it is they are not trustworthy.

Display:
I wonder where the poll numbers are among the American public for bombing Iran. Not that it matters either way as our military is now controlled by a fantastically small group of people.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 12:24:20 AM EST
PollingReport.com is your friend. In the latest poll, it is still just 21% who want bombing now, unchanged since last June, but those who think Iran is not a threat reduced to just 14%, so the ratio of those who can be fooled like four years ago is high.

Also interesting a poll from January: only 24% think the Cheney Administration is not confrontational enough, but a further 37% think it is handling the issue about right.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 06:18:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
<chuckle>

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 06:23:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
From today's New York Times editorial:

... if Mr. Bush is worried that Americans no longer believe him when he warns of mortal threats to the country -- and he should be -- he needs to start proving that he really understands who is most responsible for the Iraq disaster. And he needs to explain how he plans to extricate American troops without setting off an even bigger war.


Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 01:16:00 AM EST
Nice deconstruction, metavision, and a good diary after being quiet for so long...

Can you drop me an e-mail?

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 03:20:27 AM EST
Thank you, Migeru.  It has been metahardtimes here since the holidays, but I think I have finally imagined a mythical shelving unit to take the load off my shoulders for now.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 01:56:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Regarding shaped-charge explosives: "Their components require precision machining that Iraq has shown no evidence of being able to perform."

Really? Is this because there are no standard machine tools in Iraq, or because there are no Iraqis clever enough to operate them? One day, they're making nuclear weapons, the next day, they can't make metal objects with reasonably good cylindrical symmetry. I'm puzzled.

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.

by technopolitical on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 03:59:00 AM EST
All part of their plan to wear us down. Isn't it dispiriting that they can even thing that they could get away with this shit?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 04:04:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They think they can get away with it, but whatever window might have been opened is being closed by the press doing at least a half-decent job of pointing out that the Bushies can't prove a bit of this.  The basic line appears, for the moment, to be to point out that even the existence of weapons apparently originating in Iran does not serve to indict Tehran, because money can easily flow from Sunni and Shi'ia communities within the country to insurgents in Iraq, allowing weapons to be bought on the black market.  And that's exactly what I suspect is going on, because Iran has no incentive to give the Bush administration any excuse to launch another war.  Surely Iran knows that, while an occupation would be disastrous, the American military would have no problem defeating its Iranian counterpart.  Otherwise the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad desperately need to have their heads examined.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 12:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's also ridiculous, on its face, to assume that weapons or money coming from Iran are the result of action (or inaction) by the government.  Somehow we seem to have a difficult time stopping money going from Miami to Havana (despite there being, you know, a body of water in the way), yet Tehran is assumed to have full control over everything that occurs within its borders.

And I love the charges,given that the Neocons made no effort, whatsoevver, to plan for border security after the invasion began.  This is classic Bush administration strategy: Create a giant mess, and then say to the public, "You know, somebody really ought to clean that shit up."

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 12:51:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Pace Demurs on Accusation of Iran

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said yesterday that he has no information indicating Iran's government is directing the supply of lethal weapons to Shiite insurgent groups in Iraq.

"We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran," Pace told Voice of America during a visit to Australia. "What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se, knows about this."

"It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved," he continued, "but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit."

White House spokesman Tony Snow:

Let me put it this way.  There's not a whole lot of freelancing in the Iranian government, especially when it comes to something like that. ... Look, the Department of Defense is doing this. What I'm telling you is, you guys want to get those questions answered, you need to go to the Pentagon.

Article points out:

Members of Congress have repeatedly asked whether the administration is planning a repeat in Iran of its 2003 invasion of Iraq. Intelligence findings that Iraq's Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and had close ties to al-Qaeda turned out to be almost entirely false.


Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 04:18:32 AM EST
Former CIA case officer Robert Baer of Sleeping with the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude fame, wrote in TIME yesterday that:

There's little doubt that the Iranians have free run of much of Iraq; are supplying arms and ammunition to Shi'a militias; and are committed to seeing the United States fail in that country. Iran already essentially owns Basra as well as several other large Shi'a towns in the south. And, unlike our own, Iranian interests in Iraq are unambiguous. In 2004, when I was in Qum, an influential Iranian cleric, Ayatollah Sanae, told me with chilling clarity: Should the situation in Iraq deteriorate to the point that the Shi'a are seriously threatened, Iran will have no choice but to step in militarily. Even, he made clear, at the risk of American retaliation.

In the article, he mentions the "the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps's Quds force", which he describes as

virtually impenetrable. Secretive and disciplined, the Quds force is more a cult than anything else. Its members are all believers, meticulously selected, vetted and controlled. Another reason we'll probably never catch the Quds force red handed is that it communicates sensitive information by courier. No blogs or calling home to brag to mom about everything they're doing in Iraq for Allah and Iran.

Thus, since these Quds are too secretive to give Washington the "smoking gun" they need to justify an attack on Iran,

If indeed a confrontation is in the cards, I don't see that the Administration has a choice other than to provoke an incident -- force the Iranians to fire back in the clear light of day, letting the United States invoke self defense, U.N. Article 51. Options might include arresting or assassinating the Mahdi Army leader Moqtada Al-Sadr, chasing Iranians in hot pursuit across their border, or, more bluntly, bombing a Quds Force base in Iran in the name of force protection.

I don't think these explosively formed penetrators are going to cut it as a casus belli which will rally the American people around the Stars & Stripes for war again.

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 04:58:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...would it be any less of a stupid ass idea to invade? Would there be any reason at all not to believe the result would be as disastrous as it was in Afghanistan and Iraq?

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 05:55:36 AM EST
No, but the discussion then must ask, why would they want to ? I think there's a congruence of influences that's making it very attractive.

  1. A war in the gulf will send oil prices sky high, creating a nice little earner for Bush's chums, especially Dick "Shotgun" Cheney,

  2. A war in the gulf will increase arms spending, massively boosting the corporate profits of Bush's chums, especially Dick "secret 4th branch of Govt" Cheney

  3. Israel fears that Iran is sponsoring palestinian aggression. They are also paranoid that the Iranians will nuke them in their beds if they don't nuke 'em first.

It's just too tempting.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 01:58:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You hit the nail, Helen.  I am finding that "profit is the answer" to every single piece of news that makes no sense to any reasonable human being.  When I can find no explanation, there is always a link to a profit to be made, when powerful people act insanely.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 02:33:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think it's dreams of Empire. They want to control the region, period. Money certainly is a big factor, but ultimately it's good old fashioned control they're after. The unitary executive theory of constitutional law is another part of it.

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 03:12:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am going more for the insane that for the profits.

Iraq was really about profits..but Iran.. they should known that when you produce such a huge change in worldwide scenario things can turn out completely different that what your pockets expected. this is not like holding some oil in a non-nuclear deciamted country for the sake of ahving bases and project power. this is about attackign anation who has Ormuz under control, who can launch attacks and where the situation can lead to nuclear weapons and a balance of terror.

In case they think they can make money out of this.... they are insane.

So it cuts both ways at the end.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 03:15:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There's always the theory that the Bush administration, fundamentalist Christians that they are, are attempting to bring about the apocalypse...no need to worry about global warming either, we ain't gonna be here much longer  anyway!
I guess our last best hope is the Bush administration being raptured up to heaven before they get to enact their plans...

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 03:27:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But the end of the world  the end of profits.. so it is clearly not the case :)

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 04:34:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bernhard over at moonofalabama.org had a comment about the found weapons: the text on the bombs was in english and they used a western log system.  (Not to mention the western calendar: bombs dated "2006".)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iragiran12feb12b-pg,1,7892215.photogallery?coll= la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true

His suggestion was that the iranians would naturally use farsi for writing, and their own dating system...  Does anyone have any info. on the "signage" of armaments?

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 06:23:58 AM EST
Sorry, here's the link to bernhard's post.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2007/02/the_us_officer_.html#comments

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 06:28:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well....

A latest post over at moonofalabama has a link to the iranian website where you can buy munitions...

Which explains the english text....

Apparently there's an order button on the site.

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 06:38:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So if anyone would like to buy some anti-tank missiles...

http://www.diomil.ir/en/aboutus.aspx

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 07:11:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
One careful lady owner, never raced or rallied....

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 07:33:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps Halliburton and KBR could get a bargain deal on a bulk order and sell to them to the US troops in Iraq.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 07:41:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Please don´t give ´em any ideas!  That line of thinking is exactly their style.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 08:28:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Would be a bit of a twist though. Instead of selling weapons to Iran, they're buying weapons from Iran! Guess they ran out Contras to bankroll...;-)

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 04:07:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 12:55:02 PM EST
WTF?  Was not the picture I inserted.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 12:55:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's a great graph, though. I love it!
by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 01:05:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I get a little x in a square.  Don´t think I can see it.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 01:59:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you, everyone for the additions.  I am still seeing US headlines that are "untrue" and it worries me that´s what stays in people´s minds.  When they make "actual statements of fact", they are buried so deep in the article that they barely stand out.

Found this part of "the presentation" on TPM, for whatever it does not prove...  Apparently the "anonymous US foreign policy" gave it to fox-no-news.

http://tinyurl.com/ynn2vo

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Tue Feb 13th, 2007 at 02:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the main point about this orchestration was that they haven't shown any actual evidence of Iranian origin of the weapons, only told of one claimed eivdence of captured smugglers paired with lots of baseless hypotheses while talking about real weapons, and weaving in irrelevant stuff like Iranians found with Abdul Aziz al-Hakim -- the leader of SCIRI, the main government party, which was founded in Iran by exiles in the eighties...

But I think I can answer a number of your critical questions.

2.  A cylindrical bomb.  Do they park their H´s wherever they see a cylindrical artifact?

These weapons are buried.

they CONTRADICTED THEMSELVES:  "...it's never going to happen," he said.

I think they meant that the Quds Force is only smuggling weapons into Iraq, but lets Iraqis use (and get caught with) them once there. Then again, I think that's silly too, why let yourself be caught even as smugglers when you can have Iraqis doing the smuggling? ...and he contradicts himself on that, as you note later.

What does a "pene-traitor" look like???
Malleable means shapeable, bendable... right?  Which seems to contradict the purpose of something to ___trate metal and armor

A 'penetrator' is something cutting a hole through armor, so that the inside can be blasted. For thick steel, the penetrator is not a solid body: it's a piece of super-hot metal melted by munitions explosion or impact, and this liquid metal melts its way across the steel. And that in a fraction of the second, having impacted with enough kinetic energy for some to remain at the end of the process, so that the end of the drop of molten metal will provide the blast inside the tank all by itself. The infamous DU (depleted uranium) munitions can work this way, and so do the also infamous RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades) used by the other side. So in general, this is no new technology, what's new is its use in such large bombs/mines.

A small office, in a small town, in a war zone, where the, rare, sanitation systems have been destroyed, not only has a toilet handy

Al-Hakim is the most powerful cleric in Iraq (OK Sistani is more revered, but the SCIRI head and former top commander of the Badr Brigades has control over the most armed people), and I'd expect his offices to be a few comfort levels higher than the Iraqi average. Irbil is deep in Kurdish autonomous territory, it didn't experience war since the inter-Kurd conflicts in the nineties (and no aerial bombing since Saddam's Anfal and possibly end-of-Gulf-War campaigns).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 07:40:07 AM EST
Thank you, DoDo.  It is good to have solid details I can trust, for some of my real questions, even though I still cannot buy the overall theory of the claim.

I hope we, doubters, create enough pressure to avoid another killing front, simply because only the least responsible would die and it still wouldn´t solve anything.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 02:03:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
by oldfrog on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 03:56:30 PM EST
Thank you, frog!

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Wed Feb 14th, 2007 at 04:07:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]