Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
July 11, 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Okinawa_F-100_crash
55 Years Since Miyamori Elementary School Crash
Ryukyu Shimpo, Japan
By Editorial
Translated By Courtney Coppernoll
1 July 2014
Edited by Gillian Palmer
What place should be safer for children than an elementary school? In 1959, when children at Miyamori Elementary School were waiting for the milk to drink with their school lunches, the school was suddenly engulfed in flames, and the children struck by a “ball of fire.” There is no way that such an outrage can ever be forgiven. Still less can such an event ever be repeated.
Fifty-five years have passed since that incident, in which a U.S. military aircraft crashed into the Ishikawa (modern day Uruma) school, killing 18 and injuring more than 200. At a recent memorial service, those affected were given an avenue to express themselves. That the children of those who survived the Battle of Okinawa should fall victim to such an accident is surely a “double victimization.” I want to deeply impress such outrageous post-war Okinawan history on others' hearts and minds.
According to those enrolled at the school at the time of the accident, their first alumni meeting was held the day before the memorial service. The fact that they were finally able to hold a meeting themselves only after 55 years have passed illustrates the depth of their emotional scars. Their eyes swim with tears as a military aircraft flies in the sky overhead. When talk turns to the accident, tears naturally well up. When you hear these sorts of stories from those who personally experienced it, you understand that even now the emotional trauma caused by the event has not been healed.
The people that day couldn't help their sons and daughters, the children under their care or their classmates. Even now, the bereaved families and teaching staff reflect regretfully upon the children who died. Yet, it's someone else who's forcing these painful thoughts upon people who have no fault or responsibility in the matter. It's both the Japanese and American governments who brought about this sort of postwar history in Okinawa, and it's they who should have the guilty conscience.
55 Years Since Miyamori Elementary School Crash
http://watchingamerica.com/News/241893/55-years-since-miyamori-elementary-school-crash/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Okinawa_F-100_crash
55 Years Since Miyamori Elementary School Crash
Ryukyu Shimpo, Japan
By Editorial
Translated By Courtney Coppernoll
1 July 2014
Edited by Gillian Palmer
What place should be safer for children than an elementary school? In 1959, when children at Miyamori Elementary School were waiting for the milk to drink with their school lunches, the school was suddenly engulfed in flames, and the children struck by a “ball of fire.” There is no way that such an outrage can ever be forgiven. Still less can such an event ever be repeated.
Fifty-five years have passed since that incident, in which a U.S. military aircraft crashed into the Ishikawa (modern day Uruma) school, killing 18 and injuring more than 200. At a recent memorial service, those affected were given an avenue to express themselves. That the children of those who survived the Battle of Okinawa should fall victim to such an accident is surely a “double victimization.” I want to deeply impress such outrageous post-war Okinawan history on others' hearts and minds.
According to those enrolled at the school at the time of the accident, their first alumni meeting was held the day before the memorial service. The fact that they were finally able to hold a meeting themselves only after 55 years have passed illustrates the depth of their emotional scars. Their eyes swim with tears as a military aircraft flies in the sky overhead. When talk turns to the accident, tears naturally well up. When you hear these sorts of stories from those who personally experienced it, you understand that even now the emotional trauma caused by the event has not been healed.
The people that day couldn't help their sons and daughters, the children under their care or their classmates. Even now, the bereaved families and teaching staff reflect regretfully upon the children who died. Yet, it's someone else who's forcing these painful thoughts upon people who have no fault or responsibility in the matter. It's both the Japanese and American governments who brought about this sort of postwar history in Okinawa, and it's they who should have the guilty conscience.
July 11, 2014
The $100+ million dollar MV-22 Osprey
Parts Fall from Osprey: Withdrawal Desired before Major Accident Occurs
Ryukyu Shimpo, Japan
By Editorial
Translated By Maisha Kuniyuki
22 June 2014
Edited by Eva Langman
During general training, a metal part fell from a U.S. Marine Corps V-22 Osprey vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft stationed at the Marine Corps Air Base at Futenma.
~snip~
Last October, the U.S. Department of Defense’s Office of the Inspector General announced that it had found a few errors in the Marine Corps V-22 Osprey’s maintenance operations and records between October 2008 and September 2011. It also indicated that "senior DoD and Marine Corps officials could have deployed MV-22 squadrons that were not prepared for missions."
Surprisingly, aircraft status information was recorded improperly 167 out of 200 times, while 112 out of 907 aircraft work orders were inadequately prepared.
In addition to the Osprey, there have been 21 confirmed incidents of objects falling from U.S. aircrafts around Okinawa since 2003. The lives and livelihoods of locals are undeniably being exposed to danger. We cannot afford to let this issue go unchecked..
Parts Fall from Osprey: Withdrawal Desired before Major Accident Occurs
http://watchingamerica.com/News/241775/parts-fall-from-osprey-withdrawal-desired-before-major-accident-occurs/The $100+ million dollar MV-22 Osprey
Parts Fall from Osprey: Withdrawal Desired before Major Accident Occurs
Ryukyu Shimpo, Japan
By Editorial
Translated By Maisha Kuniyuki
22 June 2014
Edited by Eva Langman
During general training, a metal part fell from a U.S. Marine Corps V-22 Osprey vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft stationed at the Marine Corps Air Base at Futenma.
~snip~
Last October, the U.S. Department of Defense’s Office of the Inspector General announced that it had found a few errors in the Marine Corps V-22 Osprey’s maintenance operations and records between October 2008 and September 2011. It also indicated that "senior DoD and Marine Corps officials could have deployed MV-22 squadrons that were not prepared for missions."
Surprisingly, aircraft status information was recorded improperly 167 out of 200 times, while 112 out of 907 aircraft work orders were inadequately prepared.
In addition to the Osprey, there have been 21 confirmed incidents of objects falling from U.S. aircrafts around Okinawa since 2003. The lives and livelihoods of locals are undeniably being exposed to danger. We cannot afford to let this issue go unchecked..
July 11, 2014
Eleven years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, who will return the half a million lives lost, directly or indirectly, from this war? Who will give back the billions of wasted dollars?
The Iraqi Disaster and US Responsibility
Los Tiempos, Bolivia
By Raúl Peñaranda
Translated By Courtney Cadenhead
3 July 2014
Edited by Laurence Bouvard
The U.S. invasion of Iraq was ordered in 2003, under the government of George Bush, with the pretext that Saddam Hussein, its then president-dictator, had weapons of mass destruction under his control. Whether he had them or not was unclear, as all the world — except the U.S. government — knew.
~snip~
The real reasons for the invasion, confirmed almost immediately afterward, were to get rid of an inconvenient Arabic leader at the head of an oil country, as Hussein was, and to control a part of those million-dollar resources.
First, the United States utilized air raids to destroy highways, schools, refineries, bridges and factories; then, with the resources that came from Iraqi oil, the U.S. hired North American companies with ties to their military complex in order to … rebuild those highways, schools, refineries, bridges and factories — all under allegations of price inflation. And inefficiency. Many works remain half-done despite the fact that they have been in progress for years.
A little more than a decade after the U.S. invasion, Iraq is in danger of having its unified state dissolved. The Kurds, savagely hounded by Saddam, seek their independence — something they in fact already have to a high degree. The Kurds control Kirkuk in the north of the country, along with its enormous oil reserves.
The Iraqi Disaster and US Responsibility
http://watchingamerica.com/News/241835/the-iraqi-disaster-and-us-responsibility/Eleven years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, who will return the half a million lives lost, directly or indirectly, from this war? Who will give back the billions of wasted dollars?
The Iraqi Disaster and US Responsibility
Los Tiempos, Bolivia
By Raúl Peñaranda
Translated By Courtney Cadenhead
3 July 2014
Edited by Laurence Bouvard
The U.S. invasion of Iraq was ordered in 2003, under the government of George Bush, with the pretext that Saddam Hussein, its then president-dictator, had weapons of mass destruction under his control. Whether he had them or not was unclear, as all the world — except the U.S. government — knew.
~snip~
The real reasons for the invasion, confirmed almost immediately afterward, were to get rid of an inconvenient Arabic leader at the head of an oil country, as Hussein was, and to control a part of those million-dollar resources.
First, the United States utilized air raids to destroy highways, schools, refineries, bridges and factories; then, with the resources that came from Iraqi oil, the U.S. hired North American companies with ties to their military complex in order to … rebuild those highways, schools, refineries, bridges and factories — all under allegations of price inflation. And inefficiency. Many works remain half-done despite the fact that they have been in progress for years.
A little more than a decade after the U.S. invasion, Iraq is in danger of having its unified state dissolved. The Kurds, savagely hounded by Saddam, seek their independence — something they in fact already have to a high degree. The Kurds control Kirkuk in the north of the country, along with its enormous oil reserves.
July 11, 2014
The Most Expensive Warplane in American History Is Too Dangerous to Fly and Just Caught Fire (Again) But They Plan to Spend $1 Trillion On It Anyway
by Abby Zimet
07.10.14 - 3:10 PM
Last week, just days before its long-planned, much-hyped international debut at a U.K. airshow, the entire fleet of the endless boondoggle known as the F-35 II Lightning, or Joint Strike Fighter, has been grounded after one caught fire on a runway, the latest in a years-long series of disasters almost every time it's tried to leave the ground. The plane's current pricetag of $398.6 billion equals a cost of about $49 billion a year since work began in 2006 on a project now seven years behind schedule and estimated to cost over $1 trillion when done. No doubt entirely coincidentally and in no way connected to the fact that the project is still alive, its maker Lockheed has spread its jobs, suppliers and contractors across almost every state, thus ensuring broad support in a Congress whose members want to keep their jobs. If that doesn't make you angry enough, here are a lot of cool things we could have done - provide every homeless person with a $600,000 home, feed every hungry child, fund every current humanitarian crisis - with the money.
The Most Expensive Warplane in American History Is Too Dangerous to Fly and Just Caught Fire (Again)
http://www.commondreams.org/further/2014/07/10-2The Most Expensive Warplane in American History Is Too Dangerous to Fly and Just Caught Fire (Again) But They Plan to Spend $1 Trillion On It Anyway
by Abby Zimet
07.10.14 - 3:10 PM
Last week, just days before its long-planned, much-hyped international debut at a U.K. airshow, the entire fleet of the endless boondoggle known as the F-35 II Lightning, or Joint Strike Fighter, has been grounded after one caught fire on a runway, the latest in a years-long series of disasters almost every time it's tried to leave the ground. The plane's current pricetag of $398.6 billion equals a cost of about $49 billion a year since work began in 2006 on a project now seven years behind schedule and estimated to cost over $1 trillion when done. No doubt entirely coincidentally and in no way connected to the fact that the project is still alive, its maker Lockheed has spread its jobs, suppliers and contractors across almost every state, thus ensuring broad support in a Congress whose members want to keep their jobs. If that doesn't make you angry enough, here are a lot of cool things we could have done - provide every homeless person with a $600,000 home, feed every hungry child, fund every current humanitarian crisis - with the money.
July 10, 2014
Contract Hit
Junge Welt, Germany
By Rainer Rupp
Translated By Ron Argentati
1 July 2014
Edited by Gillian Palmer
According to an article published in The New York Times last Sunday, a senior employee of the infamous private mercenary company Blackwater — since rechristened with the posh-sounding name “Academi” — threatened a U.S. government official with murder unless he stopped investigating the company. The Blackwater official's threat was even supported by the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, which in turn forced the inspector to terminate his investigations in Iraq. Official government documents that have become public in the murder trial of four Blackwater mercenaries support this charge. The trial, which began June 11 in U.S. district court in Washington, D.C., rekindles memories of U.S. actions in Iraq, which were characterized by extreme and inhuman brutality against the civilian population.
It has been nearly seven years since the four mercenaries — along with several other “companions” now standing trial for the Sept. 16, 2007 act in Baghdad's Nisur Square —began firing wildly, an action that resulted in the deaths of 14 civilians (men, women and children) and the serious wounding of another 18 people. Several investigations took place at the time — one by the Iraqi government and others done by The New York Times and Washington Post — revealed that there was no provocation to justify the shooting of unarmed civilians by Blackwater mercenaries and that at no time were they ever under threat. Under public pressure, the George W. Bush administration dispatched a team of investigators to Iraq under the direction of Jean C. Richter, a special agent in charge of providing security for U.S. diplomats, to look into the charges made against Blackwater.
In this connection, attention began focusing on repeated meetings between U.S. inspector Richter and his assistant with Iraq's Blackwater boss, Carroll, who was concerned about his billions of dollars in contracts to protect U.S. diplomats. According to Richter, Carroll threatened he could “shoot him here and now”* with no one ever questioning it because, as he said, they were in Iraq. Richter took Carroll's threats seriously, according to memorandums written, and informed the State Department of the threats. Richter felt that in a war zone anything could happen, especially wherever there might be a possibility of interfering with lucrative contracts.
What is noteworthy in this story is the fact that despite this disturbing incident the U.S. State Department did not react and continues to award contracts to Blackwater and its successor up to the present day. This is an indication that corruption and moral decadence had long since permeated even the upper levels of supposedly sacrosanct American diplomacy. And it's typical that the Nisur Square killers are on trial today not because of the efforts of the U.S. government, but due to the efforts of Iraqi survivors of the massacre and their relatives, who are supported by U.S. human rights activists.
Blackwater: Contract Hit
http://watchingamerica.com/News/241784/contract-hit/Contract Hit
Junge Welt, Germany
By Rainer Rupp
Translated By Ron Argentati
1 July 2014
Edited by Gillian Palmer
According to an article published in The New York Times last Sunday, a senior employee of the infamous private mercenary company Blackwater — since rechristened with the posh-sounding name “Academi” — threatened a U.S. government official with murder unless he stopped investigating the company. The Blackwater official's threat was even supported by the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, which in turn forced the inspector to terminate his investigations in Iraq. Official government documents that have become public in the murder trial of four Blackwater mercenaries support this charge. The trial, which began June 11 in U.S. district court in Washington, D.C., rekindles memories of U.S. actions in Iraq, which were characterized by extreme and inhuman brutality against the civilian population.
It has been nearly seven years since the four mercenaries — along with several other “companions” now standing trial for the Sept. 16, 2007 act in Baghdad's Nisur Square —began firing wildly, an action that resulted in the deaths of 14 civilians (men, women and children) and the serious wounding of another 18 people. Several investigations took place at the time — one by the Iraqi government and others done by The New York Times and Washington Post — revealed that there was no provocation to justify the shooting of unarmed civilians by Blackwater mercenaries and that at no time were they ever under threat. Under public pressure, the George W. Bush administration dispatched a team of investigators to Iraq under the direction of Jean C. Richter, a special agent in charge of providing security for U.S. diplomats, to look into the charges made against Blackwater.
In this connection, attention began focusing on repeated meetings between U.S. inspector Richter and his assistant with Iraq's Blackwater boss, Carroll, who was concerned about his billions of dollars in contracts to protect U.S. diplomats. According to Richter, Carroll threatened he could “shoot him here and now”* with no one ever questioning it because, as he said, they were in Iraq. Richter took Carroll's threats seriously, according to memorandums written, and informed the State Department of the threats. Richter felt that in a war zone anything could happen, especially wherever there might be a possibility of interfering with lucrative contracts.
What is noteworthy in this story is the fact that despite this disturbing incident the U.S. State Department did not react and continues to award contracts to Blackwater and its successor up to the present day. This is an indication that corruption and moral decadence had long since permeated even the upper levels of supposedly sacrosanct American diplomacy. And it's typical that the Nisur Square killers are on trial today not because of the efforts of the U.S. government, but due to the efforts of Iraqi survivors of the massacre and their relatives, who are supported by U.S. human rights activists.
July 10, 2014
Is Japan's peace constitution dead?
By John Feffer
Jul 10, '14
WASHINGTON - Japan has functioned under its "peace constitution" for nearly 70 years. The distinctive Article 9, which prevents the country from conducting war as a means of resolving international conflict, is showing its age. Over the last several decades, after repeated "reinterpretations, the peace constitution has become increasingly enfeebled. With its latest decision, the government of Shinzo Abe has quite nearly euthanized the document.
The Abe government recently announced a Cabinet decision that commits Japan to the principle of collective self-defense. Tokyo, in other words, can use force not only in self-defense but also to help an ally in peril, even if Japan itself is not under attack.
Prime Minister Abe has stressed that this reform reduces the risk of Japan being involved in war. He has also emphasized that this is not a major change in how Japan handles its foreign and military policy - and thereby does not violate the peace constitution. But the changes will in fact have significant implications.
The United States, which has long prodded Japan to shoulder more security responsibilities, immediately praised Abe's bold move. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel called it "an important step for Japan as it seeks to make a greater contribution to regional and global peace and security".
Is Japan's peace constitution dead?
http://atimes.com/atimes/Japan/JAP-01-100714.htmlIs Japan's peace constitution dead?
By John Feffer
Jul 10, '14
WASHINGTON - Japan has functioned under its "peace constitution" for nearly 70 years. The distinctive Article 9, which prevents the country from conducting war as a means of resolving international conflict, is showing its age. Over the last several decades, after repeated "reinterpretations, the peace constitution has become increasingly enfeebled. With its latest decision, the government of Shinzo Abe has quite nearly euthanized the document.
The Abe government recently announced a Cabinet decision that commits Japan to the principle of collective self-defense. Tokyo, in other words, can use force not only in self-defense but also to help an ally in peril, even if Japan itself is not under attack.
Prime Minister Abe has stressed that this reform reduces the risk of Japan being involved in war. He has also emphasized that this is not a major change in how Japan handles its foreign and military policy - and thereby does not violate the peace constitution. But the changes will in fact have significant implications.
The United States, which has long prodded Japan to shoulder more security responsibilities, immediately praised Abe's bold move. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel called it "an important step for Japan as it seeks to make a greater contribution to regional and global peace and security".
July 10, 2014
Not Serious re: Terrorism: GOP House Cut out funding for al-Qaeda, Iraq Records & Research
By Juan Cole | Jul. 8, 2014
Representatives on the Hill talk a good game about going back into Iraq or pursuing a global war on terror, but they aren’t actually very interested in all that. Exhibit A: they’ve applied the same austerity to the Conflict Records Research Center as they did to the working poor and Veterans on food stamps.
~snip~
“CRRC CRRC@ndu.edu
date: Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 4:22 PM
subject: CRRC Status Update July 2014
CONFLICT RECORDS RESEARCH CENTER Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Fort Lesley J. McNair Washington, D.C. 20319
We are writing to provide you with a brief update on the status of the Conflict Records Research Center (CRRC). The CRRC, which has previously received generous funding from the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy (OSD(P)), has no funding beyond the end of the current fiscal year. Unless something changes immediately, the center will close its doors sometime prior to September 30, 2014. Throughout the remainder of the fiscal year, CRRC personnel shortages will severely and adversely affect the center’s ability to host researchers, respond to e-mails, update the center’s website, or conduct other CRRC operations.
The CRRC, which focuses on al-Qaeda affiliated terrorism and Iraq, is on the verge of closing its doors just as battlefield victories by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), fighting alongside former elements of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist regime, remind observers of the continuing need for precisely the sort of research that the CRRC enables and provides. The CRRC has been honored to support innovative research and scholarship on these and other important topics since 2010.
If the CRRC does not receive funding immediately and hire personnel prior to September 30, it will shut down and the National Archives (NARA) will take ownership of all existing CRRC records. As explained below, the records will not be available to researchers for a considerable number of years. In addition, current CRRC holdings, which constitute less than one percent of the records that the center has been working to make available, will be frozen in time. No new records will be added.
Not Serious re: Terrorism: GOP House Cut out funding for al-Qaeda, Iraq Records & Research
http://www.juancole.com/2014/07/terrorism-funding-research.htmlNot Serious re: Terrorism: GOP House Cut out funding for al-Qaeda, Iraq Records & Research
By Juan Cole | Jul. 8, 2014
Representatives on the Hill talk a good game about going back into Iraq or pursuing a global war on terror, but they aren’t actually very interested in all that. Exhibit A: they’ve applied the same austerity to the Conflict Records Research Center as they did to the working poor and Veterans on food stamps.
~snip~
“CRRC CRRC@ndu.edu
date: Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 4:22 PM
subject: CRRC Status Update July 2014
CONFLICT RECORDS RESEARCH CENTER Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Fort Lesley J. McNair Washington, D.C. 20319
We are writing to provide you with a brief update on the status of the Conflict Records Research Center (CRRC). The CRRC, which has previously received generous funding from the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy (OSD(P)), has no funding beyond the end of the current fiscal year. Unless something changes immediately, the center will close its doors sometime prior to September 30, 2014. Throughout the remainder of the fiscal year, CRRC personnel shortages will severely and adversely affect the center’s ability to host researchers, respond to e-mails, update the center’s website, or conduct other CRRC operations.
The CRRC, which focuses on al-Qaeda affiliated terrorism and Iraq, is on the verge of closing its doors just as battlefield victories by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), fighting alongside former elements of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist regime, remind observers of the continuing need for precisely the sort of research that the CRRC enables and provides. The CRRC has been honored to support innovative research and scholarship on these and other important topics since 2010.
If the CRRC does not receive funding immediately and hire personnel prior to September 30, it will shut down and the National Archives (NARA) will take ownership of all existing CRRC records. As explained below, the records will not be available to researchers for a considerable number of years. In addition, current CRRC holdings, which constitute less than one percent of the records that the center has been working to make available, will be frozen in time. No new records will be added.
July 9, 2014
Bush Trifecta lands on Obama: Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan Imploding
By Juan Cole | Jul. 9, 2014
President Barack Obama of Hawaii had fondly dreamed of bidding turbulent and unrewarding West Asia farewell and turning the attentions of American diplomacy to East and South East Asia. From his point of view, the Bush administration had unwisely entangled the US too deeply in the Middle East, where no good deed goes unpunished. He had opposed the Iraq War, and thought the latter diverted attention from Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Laden. He was willing to do a bit of Israel-Palestine diplomacy but not to really put his presidential prestige on the line the way Jimmy Carter had. And after all, Carter got almost no credit for averting decades more of Israel-Egypt wars.
~snip~
1.
In January 2006, the Palestine Authority held elections in Gaza and the West Bank for the first time since 1996, when President Mahmoud Abbas had been elected along with a parliament dominated by the Palestine Liberation Organization. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon did not want Hamas (the Movement for Change) to be allowed to run, since the far-right Muslim fundamentalist organization had never accepted the Oslo Peace Process. Although back in the 1980s the Israelis had backed Hamas against its secular, nationalist rival, the PLO, by 2006 the two had fallen out.
~snip~
2.
In Afghanistan, the Bush administration should have used the Northern Alliance to overthrow the Taliban and then just left. Anand Gopal has argued convincingly that US troops left in Afghanistan got drawn into tribal feuds and destabilized the south and east of the country, whereas in the north, NATO forces that were less kinetic managed to keep calm. Bush’d decision to leave tens of thousands of US soldiers in Pushtun areas, engaging in the same sort of search and destroy tactics as had turned the South Vietnamese against the US military in the late 1960s, led to a neo-Taliban resurgence.
~snip~
3.
Having illegally invaded and occupied Iraq, the Bush administration originally wanted phony ‘caucus-based’ elections in Iraq, wherein hand-picked elite Iraqis would elect corrupt financier and inveterate prevaricator Ahmad Chalabi as prime minister. Some say Chalabi was a double agent, working for Iran. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the spiritual head of Iraq’s majority Shiite population, over-ruled Bush and insisted on one-person one vote parliamentary elections. Being the majority, the Shiites won in January 2005, but not just any Shiites. It was the pro-Iran fundamentalist Shiites that Bush inadvertently brought to power. Ooops. They went on deeply to alienate the formerly dominant Sunni minority, leading to the present Sunni rebellion in northern and western Iraq, in alliance with an al-Qaeda offshoot None of this would be happening if Bush hadn’t invaded on false pretenses.
Bush Trifecta lands on Obama: Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan Imploding
http://www.juancole.com/2014/07/trifecta-afghanistan-imploding.htmlBush Trifecta lands on Obama: Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan Imploding
By Juan Cole | Jul. 9, 2014
President Barack Obama of Hawaii had fondly dreamed of bidding turbulent and unrewarding West Asia farewell and turning the attentions of American diplomacy to East and South East Asia. From his point of view, the Bush administration had unwisely entangled the US too deeply in the Middle East, where no good deed goes unpunished. He had opposed the Iraq War, and thought the latter diverted attention from Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Laden. He was willing to do a bit of Israel-Palestine diplomacy but not to really put his presidential prestige on the line the way Jimmy Carter had. And after all, Carter got almost no credit for averting decades more of Israel-Egypt wars.
~snip~
1.
In January 2006, the Palestine Authority held elections in Gaza and the West Bank for the first time since 1996, when President Mahmoud Abbas had been elected along with a parliament dominated by the Palestine Liberation Organization. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon did not want Hamas (the Movement for Change) to be allowed to run, since the far-right Muslim fundamentalist organization had never accepted the Oslo Peace Process. Although back in the 1980s the Israelis had backed Hamas against its secular, nationalist rival, the PLO, by 2006 the two had fallen out.
~snip~
2.
In Afghanistan, the Bush administration should have used the Northern Alliance to overthrow the Taliban and then just left. Anand Gopal has argued convincingly that US troops left in Afghanistan got drawn into tribal feuds and destabilized the south and east of the country, whereas in the north, NATO forces that were less kinetic managed to keep calm. Bush’d decision to leave tens of thousands of US soldiers in Pushtun areas, engaging in the same sort of search and destroy tactics as had turned the South Vietnamese against the US military in the late 1960s, led to a neo-Taliban resurgence.
~snip~
3.
Having illegally invaded and occupied Iraq, the Bush administration originally wanted phony ‘caucus-based’ elections in Iraq, wherein hand-picked elite Iraqis would elect corrupt financier and inveterate prevaricator Ahmad Chalabi as prime minister. Some say Chalabi was a double agent, working for Iran. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the spiritual head of Iraq’s majority Shiite population, over-ruled Bush and insisted on one-person one vote parliamentary elections. Being the majority, the Shiites won in January 2005, but not just any Shiites. It was the pro-Iran fundamentalist Shiites that Bush inadvertently brought to power. Ooops. They went on deeply to alienate the formerly dominant Sunni minority, leading to the present Sunni rebellion in northern and western Iraq, in alliance with an al-Qaeda offshoot None of this would be happening if Bush hadn’t invaded on false pretenses.
July 9, 2014
Senate shrugs off F-35 grounding
By Martin Matishak - 07/08/14 01:37 PM EDT
Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee are brushing off the latest setback to the $400 billion and counting F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which resulted in the grounding of the military’s jet of the future.
“I just want to keep it going,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member of the panel. “It’s too modern to fail. If we’re going to maintain superiority over other countries, we have to have that, we can’t do without it.”
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) argued the engine fire that led to the grounding is a bump in the road.
“When you develop a new system like this you’re going to have hiccups,” he said.
---
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/budget-appropriations/211520-f-35s-air-show-debut-in-jeopardy
F-35’s air show debut in jeopardy
By Martin Matishak - 07/08/14 06:00 AM EDT
The Pentagon’s costly fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is grounded, just a week before the military’s jet of the future was to have its coming-out party at two air shows in Great Britain.
The latest problem for the $400 billion program, which is already seven years behind schedule, came after an engine on one of the F-35s caught fire during a June 23 takeoff from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.
The fire led the Pentagon to ground the entire fleet, and officials on Monday said it’s uncertain whether the jets will be cleared for takeoff by next week.
A decision on whether to allow the planes to fly will be made in the “next several days,” according to Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren, based on the aircraft’s “safety and airworthiness.”
--
The thread title is from Douchebag Inhofe.
"It’s too modern to fail"
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/211584-lawmakers-shrug-off-f-35-groundingSenate shrugs off F-35 grounding
By Martin Matishak - 07/08/14 01:37 PM EDT
Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee are brushing off the latest setback to the $400 billion and counting F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which resulted in the grounding of the military’s jet of the future.
“I just want to keep it going,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member of the panel. “It’s too modern to fail. If we’re going to maintain superiority over other countries, we have to have that, we can’t do without it.”
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) argued the engine fire that led to the grounding is a bump in the road.
“When you develop a new system like this you’re going to have hiccups,” he said.
---
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/budget-appropriations/211520-f-35s-air-show-debut-in-jeopardy
F-35’s air show debut in jeopardy
By Martin Matishak - 07/08/14 06:00 AM EDT
The Pentagon’s costly fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is grounded, just a week before the military’s jet of the future was to have its coming-out party at two air shows in Great Britain.
The latest problem for the $400 billion program, which is already seven years behind schedule, came after an engine on one of the F-35s caught fire during a June 23 takeoff from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.
The fire led the Pentagon to ground the entire fleet, and officials on Monday said it’s uncertain whether the jets will be cleared for takeoff by next week.
A decision on whether to allow the planes to fly will be made in the “next several days,” according to Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren, based on the aircraft’s “safety and airworthiness.”
--
The thread title is from Douchebag Inhofe.
July 8, 2014
Despite the July 4 tributes, millions of US soldiers and veterans are in serious trouble.
Millions of Soldiers and Veterans in Trouble
by Bill Quigley
Published on Monday, July 7, 2014 by Common Dreams
Twenty two veterans kill themselves every day according to the Veterans Administration. A study by the Los Angeles Times found veterans are more than twice as likely as other civilians to commit suicide. Suicides among full-time soldiers, especially among male soldiers, are also well above the national civilian rate. USA Today reported a suicide rate of 19.9 per 100,000 for civilian men compared to rates of 31.8 per 100,000 for male soldiers and 34.2 per 100,000 for men in the National Guard.
Over 57,000 veterans are homeless on any given night according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
~snip~
More than 1.4 million veterans are living below the poverty line according to US Senate report, and another 1.4 million are just above the line. Of veterans between the ages of 18 and 34, 12.5 percent are living in poverty.
~snip~
Between 2000 and 2011 nearly one million vets were diagnosed with at least one psychological disorder and almost half had multiple disorders, according to a 2014 report of the Institute for Medicine. In another report, the Institute says an estimated 8 percent of current and former service members deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq have a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis. Other congressional reports indicate national numbers of vets using mental health to be well over a million. The VA spends over $3 billion a year on PTSD treatment annually but collect little information about the effectiveness or whether treatments are successful.
Millions of Soldiers and Veterans in Trouble
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/07/07-2Despite the July 4 tributes, millions of US soldiers and veterans are in serious trouble.
Millions of Soldiers and Veterans in Trouble
by Bill Quigley
Published on Monday, July 7, 2014 by Common Dreams
Twenty two veterans kill themselves every day according to the Veterans Administration. A study by the Los Angeles Times found veterans are more than twice as likely as other civilians to commit suicide. Suicides among full-time soldiers, especially among male soldiers, are also well above the national civilian rate. USA Today reported a suicide rate of 19.9 per 100,000 for civilian men compared to rates of 31.8 per 100,000 for male soldiers and 34.2 per 100,000 for men in the National Guard.
Over 57,000 veterans are homeless on any given night according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
~snip~
More than 1.4 million veterans are living below the poverty line according to US Senate report, and another 1.4 million are just above the line. Of veterans between the ages of 18 and 34, 12.5 percent are living in poverty.
~snip~
Between 2000 and 2011 nearly one million vets were diagnosed with at least one psychological disorder and almost half had multiple disorders, according to a 2014 report of the Institute for Medicine. In another report, the Institute says an estimated 8 percent of current and former service members deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq have a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis. Other congressional reports indicate national numbers of vets using mental health to be well over a million. The VA spends over $3 billion a year on PTSD treatment annually but collect little information about the effectiveness or whether treatments are successful.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
