Wednesday, May 19, 2004

Posted here Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 10:17:08 PM     This kind of policy earns high marks in workability. The americans could have led with thsi kind of proposal, which is probably inevitable (unless things get really much worse), but again missed the opportunity for any kind of leadership. http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en65229&;F_catID=&f_type=source UNITED NATIONS: Germany wants Iraq to set up a national security council to resolve disputes about military action between US-led forces, the Iraqi army and the new interim government, its diplomats said on Wednesday. The proposal was part of an effort to resolve the most controversial section of a planned UN Security Council resolution on Iraq - the relationship between the Iraqi army and police and the US-led foreign troops. Basically there is no disagreement in the council that Iraqi forces can say "no" to participation in an American military operation, but German envoys told reporters there should be a "mechanism" for them to do this. The idea of some kind of coordinating body for security is shared by other Security Council members, said Pakistan's Ambassador Munir Akram, this month's council president. "Part of the discussion is the possibility of a sort of consultative committee in which there would be representation of all sides... and that the actual security policy would be coordinated," he said. ********

Posted here Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 7:38:31 PM     The handoff. It is looking like Bush wants a fast turn around and is willing to shift oil revenue to Iraq, and much else, except the first appointments and the security forces. But I look for even these to be offered up in order to get UN/NATO support. That suggests that oil and strategy were not solid pieces of Bush strategy, that only being a bully was the driver. It was never thought through and all has been the instinct of a small group of amateurs at real power. The plot thins.   ********

Posted here Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 12:56:47 PM     Is the Sivits trial too fast? I so far do not trust it. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/19/international/middleeast/19CND-IRAQ.html But Specialist Sivits said that one of the other soldiers participating in the abuses — he said he could not remember who — said the soldiers had been told by people with military intelligence, commonly referred to as M.I., to mistreat the officials. "They told me later they were asked to do this," the defendant said. "Who told you that?" the judge asked. "One of the six," Specialist Sivits replied. "They told me they were told by M.I. to keep doing what they were doing. It was working. They were talking." Specialist Sivits — who the father of two children and a Little League baseball coach — described conditions in the prison as "hell." "We were being attacked by mortars, rockets, small-arms fire," he said. "It was dark. The prison was overcrowded. It was dark. It was like hell, sir." ********

Posted here Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 12:35:24 PM     Deterioration, such as in Iraq, always brings out activities that were below the threshold before. One now is, everyone is angry and upset. The kind of mood that can lead to the attack on might have been  an Iraq wedding party. Note that we have WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The situation in Iraq could become more violent after the June 30 handover leading up to elections, which could require the deployment of more U.S. forces, the head of U.S. Central Command said on Wednesday. That is, in order to calm hostility to the US, we will put in more troops. ********